Home » Self-Publishing, Self-Publishing Warnings » Should This Teacher Be Fired For His Sexually Explicit Self-Published Book?

Should This Teacher Be Fired For His Sexually Explicit Self-Published Book?

20 September 2012

From The Jane Dough:

 For crying out loud. High school guidance counselor (and girls’ basketball coach, which will make you retroactively throw up in your mouth as you read this story) Bryan Craig has been fired by the board of his Chicago school district after publishing an e-book titled It’s Her Fault, “a guide [for women] to gaining the ‘upper hand in a relationship’ because he is tired of hearing them complain.”

. . . .

Craig reveals that he moonlights as a strip club bouncer which, he says, helps him manage his anger and be nicer to his wife.

One confessional reads: ‘Even though I feel I’m beyond the highest caliber of men, I still have a weakness for cleavage.’

. . . .

Craig holds a number of scientifically invalid and personally pretty gross beliefs about women. So it’s not hard to see why the school board voted unanimously to fire him. But…the rabid free speech advocate in me wonders if he was fired for the right reasons. Certainly someone who has such bizarre and unfounded beliefs about women shouldn’t be in a position to educate them — but I get the feeling that the school board was more upset about the explicitly sexual nature of the book than the advice offered therein.

. . . .

Can we look forward to teachers getting fired because they moonlight as Harlequin romance writers in the future?

Link to the rest at The Jane Dough

Self-Publishing, Self-Publishing Warnings

99 Comments to “Should This Teacher Be Fired For His Sexually Explicit Self-Published Book?”

  1. I heard about this a few weeks ago.

    “Can we look forward to teachers getting fired because they moonlight as Harlequin romance writers in the future?”

    I’m going to go with “doubtful.” He didn’t get canned because he wrote a fictional romantic account, he got canned because a) he wrote a non-fiction book that showcased his poor view of women, and b) the position he held at the school. A) made it impossible for the school to continue with B).

    This isn’t in the same league as the handful of women who’ve been fired for stripping on the side, which I think is a travesty.

    • Oh, and this really bugged me: “…but I get the feeling that the school board was more upset about the explicitly sexual nature of the book than the advice offered therein.”

      There’s nothing in the story to support that, and it seems like the writer is attempting to create an injustice where one doesn’t exist.

  2. Romance novelists deal with this all the time. There was the notorious case last year of Judy Mays: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/29/teacher-judy-buranichs-se_n_855526.html

    Turns out the women raising the stink were just a couple of small town gossipy “female-dog-like-persons”. Even the boy in question came on Judy’s Facebook page defending Judy and telling the world is mother was a lunatic.

    I know many MANY teachers who go home at night and write romance, including erotic romance.

    This guy, however, sounds like a jerk and a misogynist and should not be allowed around women of ANY age, and should certainly not be educating them.

  3. “Craig reveals that he moonlights as a strip club bouncer which, he says, helps him manage his anger and be nicer to his wife.”


    Yup, hold on, I’m reaching for my Avon Lady costume.

    I rather take the view that if I had a daughter, Mr Craig would not be permitted within two states of her.


    • Why, because he beats up rude patrons at strip clubs? Doesn’t that say more about protection than perversity?

      • I dunno. The quote says he has a weakness for cleavage, so it sounds like he goes there more for the paid ogling than the paid protecting. How that helps him be nicer to his wife, I dunno, unless ogling calms him down.


  4. “Obviously, this is disgusting, and obviously, despite his masters in counseling psychology (and being inexplicably married), Craig holds a number of scientifically invalid and personally pretty gross beliefs about women. ”

    In her opinion.

    Personally I believe in the right of people to hold opinions different from me, and don’t suffer from the kind of hubris that means I feel entitled to slap people with these kinds of offensive labels.

    What matters is how people actually behave in real life, and their reputation and history.

    His man clearly has an established high reputation or he would not be in his job, and victimising him for his beliefs seems to me to be not just UnAmerican, but grossly so.

    • He can have whatever asshat opinions he wants but with his avowed penchant for ogling cleavage he should be allowed no where near underage teenage girls, or in a position to pass on his asshatery ideas to impressionable young men. A coach in particular tends to be looked on as an authority figure to be obeyed and should be passing on the ideals of sportsmanship, fitness, and teamwork, not that women are objects and the only interesting thing about them is their “bounce”.

      • Kat – I am baffled as to how you think that ‘I still have a weakness for cleavage’ is remotely the basis for not allowing a man to work with ‘underage teenage girls’ ?

        I may be a percentage off, but I am pretty sure this applies to 99% of all heterosexual males on the planet ………

        And similar penchants among almost all heterosexual women for some broadly equivalent aspects of male physique, such as height, broad shoulders, nice butt, would also be true imho.

        • I totally agree, Howard. As long as the man acts professionally in the classroom, I don’t see where the problem is.

          • And if he wrote a how-to guide specifically on how to pick up high school girls?

            • From the high school guy’s perspective or the creepy forty year-old’s perspective?

            • But did he?

              • Arguably. If the quotes are accurate, he points out that girls with low self-esteem are easy marks for guys who just want to get into a girl’s pants. He also claims that guys must do this to “learn how to fall in love with the right girl” eventually.

                I call that a creeper’s guide to picking up high school girls; low self-esteem is endemic to the breed. (Been there, done that, used stubbornness in place of self-esteem in a few places.)

      • His avowed penchant for ogling cleavage? Allow me to be the barbarian since a lot of other men won’t say it – welcome to what 95% of men are thinking but won’t say out loud because of reactions just like this.

  5. I think that outside of work people should be free to express their personal opinions as long as they do so within the law.

    That said, I think he should have been fired if he was moonlighting at a strip-joint without the knowledge of the employer.

    • “That said, I think he should have been fired because he was working at a strip-joint.”

      That’s the part you have a problem with? :D

      And he is free to express his opinions; he’s not in jail. What he isn’t free from is consequence.

      • I think most fulltime employers would have a problem with someone moonlighting in another job without their knowledge. And I’ve fired people for doing so myself.

        Doesn’t really matter what job they are moonlighting at, either. A member of staff isn’t going to be on the top of their game if they are working until 1 or 2 in the morning.

        • I’m obviously not sure of the particulars of his other job (he may just work weekends), but fair enough. It seemed that you took issue with where he worked, not that he worked.

          That being said, I think it’s interesting that you take issue with him having a part-time job, but not that he admits to wildly misogynistic viewpoints when he’s a guidance counselor and girl’s hoop coach.

          • There is no evidence that he brought those views into work, Dan. As far as the article says no one had complained about his work until they read the book.

            The world is absolutely full of people I don’t agree with. Do I think obnoxious opinions are a reason to fire someone? No. Not unless you can show the opinions actually had an effect at work.

            • No employer has to show that the opinions have had an effect (in most states, they don’t have to show anything). Anyway, an employer has every right to fire someone whose personal opinions MAY have an effect.

              A soldier who writes a book in which he expresses sympathy for Al Qaeda will assuredly lose his clearance, and would probably get discharged.

              A Catholic priest who writes about no longer believing in God or being pro-choice would have to find another line of work (we’ve seen that happen before).

              Last weekend, an NFL official was removed from a Saints game because he’s a Saints fan. There may have never been a conflict, but the possibility of one is enough.

              It has nothing to do with whether or not you or I personally agree with an opinion (or the right to have and express it), but it has everything to do with whether those opinions contradict the job someone was hired to do.

              • Well, we come from different countries, Dan.

                From a legal standpoint, in most jurisdictions soldiers are not treated the same as civilians legally. Civilians are subject to civil law, soldiers are subject to military law. They give up many civil rights during the term of their enlistment.

                As for catholic priests, their belief in God clearly does effect their ability to work. Their most important function is to officiate during the sacraments’. They cannot do this if they are not in communion with God, and they cannot be in communion with God if they do not believe in God.

                Similarly, in the UK it is a criminal offense for an employer to allow someone to work for more than 48 hours in a week without having them sign a form opting out of certain legal rights, and recording the fact they have done so. I therefore required people to get permission for moonlighting in advance when I was an employer. But even if this law was not in place, I still believe it is important as an employer to include such a provision in the contract. And I have serious problems with someone coaching kids at sport when they are tired. Even in noncontact sports children can get rowdy, or act stupid, and if you (as a teacher) aren’t at the top of your game they could get hurt.

                My view on whether someone should be fired for their opinions expressed outside the workplace is not about US law- as I understand it people can be fired in many places in the USA for just about any reason. I just think it is an abuse of power for employers to act that way. As an employer you buy folks time, you don’t buy their soul. In my view.

                • “As an employer you buy folks time, you don’t buy their soul.”

                  You buy their time and their qualifications. If you feel their personal opinions conflict specifically with their job, you have a right to get someone more qualified.

                  Pharmacists have been fired for refusing to fill birth control prescriptions, as it clashed with their personal beliefs (still haven’t figured out how that works, by the way). They’re incapable of fulfilling their job duties. The school board in this case has a legitimate reason to believe that this teacher isn’t fully qualified to honorably guide the young girls in his charge.

                  • Under the law, unless the opinion affects the way they work – ie, is a BFOQ – it’s unlawful to fire them for their views. A priest must believe in God to properly teach the flock, while there is nothing that says a man can’t tell what he thinks about relationships and not teach at high school.

                • Looks like there is no reply button after that last post by Dan.

                  I don’t have any problem with someone being fired for their beliefs when you can show that it *has* had an effect on their work. So, if someone refuses to dispense contraceptive because it conflicts with their personal beliefs I don’t disagree with them being fired. Their job is to dispense the pills.

                  In this guys case, if he ever acts on his viewpoints at work then fire his ass.

                • Yeah, we’ve nested this baby to the max.

                  The problem is that if the school waits until the guy acts on his viewpoints, it may lead to irreparable damage to a kid.

                • Maybe the difference is how much we believe we can prevent kids from discovering dangerous ideas? The truth is I don’t believe we will ever be able to stop kids being exposed to lame ass and stupid ideas and viewpoints.

                  It’s rather like some peoples view of those anti-bacteriological cleaning products. You need some exposure to foolish and stupid ideas as a kid, or you reduce their immunity to them as a grown up and they end up falling for any idiot who looks like they are sensible.

                • Dan: Damn, I should have known better than to try to condense the explanation. Speech undertaken as part of the employee’s job duties, and speech concerning the employee’s own terms and conditions of employment, can be regulated by the government employer without violating the employee’s First Amendment speech rights; pretty much anything else is likely to be considered a matter of public interest.

                • “… pretty much anything else is likely to be considered a matter of public interest.”

                  I think you may be mistaken in the definition of something in the “public interest.”

                  This page has a listing and synopses of the relevant cases: http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/publicemployees.htm

                  At any rate, under no one’s definition does “It’s Her Fault” qualify as a matter of public concern.

                • Dan–I’m familiar with all those cases; how do you see them as contradicting what I said? The ability of a government employer to limit employee speech is a significant departure from the ability to limit speech in general, and it has to be very narrowly defined. The government could not take adverse action against the man who wrote the book under discussion here, if he were not an employee; it can only take action against him, as an employee, /based solely on the publication of the book/ if it meets the /Connick/ and /Garcetti/ standards; without actually reading the book (and I’ve no interest in putting money in its author’s pocket), there’s no way to say that it met /Connick/, and pretty much by definition it doesn’t meet /Garcetti/. That’s not to say there might be some other basis for terminating him, but mere publication of the book invokes free speech protections.

              • Dan D, while private employers with non-unionized workplaces in the US may, in many cases, fire an employee without good cause–or any stated cause–this wasn’t a private employer. This was a school district, thus a government actor; in the US, that means that the Speech Clause of the First Amendment comes into play. A public employee cannot be fired for speech in their private capacity on a matter of public interest (that’s a rough approximation of the fairly nuanced case law on public employee free speech rights). So, just publishing a book–even a fairly steamy romance, or a work setting forth opinions many other people find offensive–is not by itself grounds for termination.

                I’m expressing no opinion as to whether the employee should have been fired in this case, because I don’t know (and there is no way to learn) the information on which the school board acted, which may well have included facts beyond the mere act of publication

                • ” … on a matter of public interest.” That kind of negates your point. Unless hitting on women is considered a matter of public concern.

                  The most similar case I can find to these circumstances is San Diego v. Roe.

                • Dan–see above; I haven’t gotten the hang of this nested reply posting, and tried to reply to your reply by. . .oh the heck with it. See above!

          • I have not read his book, and to be honest I am unlikely to ever do so, but from the original article of the blog mentioned in this article – I don’t see any ‘wildly misogynistic viewpoints’. Perhaps you could expound ?

        • If people are working a second job, especially these days, it’s because there’s a financial need. Nobody does it for fun. So long as the job isn’t in direct conflict (i.e. a software developer moonlighting for a competitor) and is getting the job done effectively, not showing up late, etc., then they shouldn’t be fired. They may be carrying burdens you know nothing about (i.e. paying for nursing care for an ill parent, etc.)My former employer fired people for moonlighting, but thought nothing of making us work until the wee hours on a project for HIM, and now excuses for coming in late the next day either.

          • Well said Kat. Unless it specifically states that there is a prohibition on working elsewhere in the contract of employment which he signed, and it’s legal.

        • I suppose a staff member also wouldn’t be at the top of his game if he was writing novels until one or two in the morning.

    • *reads*

      Okay, they fired him so that he wouldn’t be lynched on school grounds. Very sensible of them. Lynchings are a mess to clean up after.

  6. I agree with most of the commenters here – this guy should have been removed from his position. He wrote a non-fiction “How To” guide for women, based on his constant contact with the ‘fairer sex’ (his own words) advising women to show lots of cleavage and camel toe and to be submissive to their men. This is not the guy I want giving ‘guidance’ to my teenage daughter or coaching her in sports, sorry.

    Big discussion on Dear Author last week might help illuminate how much the author of this article is reaching to try and show this guy was ‘wronged.’ http://dearauthor.com/news/thursday-news-rumors-of-an-amazon-phone-creepy-hs-bball-coach-provides-a-first-amendment-dilemma-bob-kohn-argues-that-he-is-a-special-snowflake/ Read the comments, especially!

    • Perhaps you could provide us with a guide on what those who advise your daughter are allowed to talk about or write about on their own time.

      • I don’t know about Anthea, but my guide would be: if someone is going to write How To manuals for relationships, they should not be stuff that would appear in Cosmo, should not resemble what appears in Cosmo, should show compassion for people with low self-esteem instead of encouraging guys to take sexual advantage of them, should show respect for people rather than suggesting that they are somehow a necessary prey-species that serves as some kind of training-wheels for guys, and should not encourage girls to dress in sexually-explicit ways to “have power over men.”

        If they’re writing fiction and it’s not kiddy-pr0n, the reins are rather a bit looser; I am well aware that one can give characters fictional stances which are not one’s own! I wouldn’t want John Norman around my kid, though, if only because his writing got seriously overblown. (And, stars know, I am the Queen of Overblown at times. However, I have never summarized the past fifteen pages every 5 pages or so, unlike Mr. Norman in one of his books. I counted.)

        • There are legal standards to adhere to, like the aforementioned kiddy porn, and then there are taste stdnards. I would argue the guy might have poor taste, but if that was a BFOQ, unemployment would be a lot higher.

          We show what we think by whether or not we buy it, not by trampling someone else’s work. How would you feel if you found out someone else at the school held Mr. Norman’s view but just didn’t write them down?

  7. I love this discussion, by the way. I’m hitting “Refresh” every five minutes.

  8. “I coach girls basketball, work in an office where I am the only male counselor, and am responsible for roughly 425 high school students a year, about half of whom are females. Suffice it to say, I have spent a considerable amount of time around, and with, the fairer sex.”

    The above are Bryan Craig’s stated qualifications for writing a book on how women should behave. The guy works as a girls’ coach and guidance counselor fergodsake, for both sexes. He is not in my opinion–and I say this as a card-carrying bleeding heart liberal–a free-speech special snowflake.

  9. I’m pulling this out of my lesser-used brain cells but dont people in positions such as this have something in the contract they signed that says “actions performed by the employee that are deemed inapropriate or that reflect poorly on the position or institution will be considered grounds for dismissal” or something to that effect.

    This guy evidently had an above average education, yet that didnt prevent him from being an idiot. I mean; what did he think was going to happen? Hello? Pen name maybe?

    I would have fired this ninny on the grounds that he’s just too stupid to have around.

    Or maybe he’s shopping for a lawsuit? Who knows.

    Still a ninny.

  10. Ok, I have to point out one thing that I don’t think I can get in edgewise in the ginormo conversation up top.

    In a lot of states you can fire a lot of people for any reason you want so long as it isn’t for being in a protected minority status (race, religion, creed, gender, etc). As a Big Boxmart employee I could get fired for writing a book about anything the store manager found inappropriate. I could get fired for any number of offhanded comments I make on twitter every day (come get me!). And there are thousands of other jobs that are exactly the same. It’s part of being in an at-will employment state. They figure that if the company wants to fire you for exercising your 1st amendment rights that they are willing to deal with a civil suit, and the companies figure that if you work at boxmart you can’t afford to put together a civil suit against them.

    Other than his likely being in a Union, and possibly not being in one of these states I don’t see any reason why his employment wouldn’t be on the same sorts of terms that mine is. He probably signed something in his contract that says something to the effect of “If we don’t like you morally whether you do it on or off school grounds we can fire you” It’s in most employment contracts in at-will states.

    Whether that *should* be acceptable in an employment contract is obviously being covered up down and sideways on here, but most likely he can be fired for most any reason the school board feels necessary and they are willing to deal with the legal repercussions of a civil suit in this case.

    And since the starting wage of most teachers is not quite enough to pay your bills, I know that a lot of them do moonlight, and they probably have it so that they can’t be fired simply for doing that (though _where_ might make a difference).

    • The difference is that he is a public employee–his employer is a government actor. As I said above, the government cannot take adverse action against him for the exercise of his free speech rights; however, in the context of government employment speech is somewhat more constrained than it is where the speaker is not a government employee.

      • And, as I pointed out above, his speech is only protected if it’s in the public interest, which this ebook clearly isn’t.

        • Um, no. Not “in the public interest,” but on a matter of public interest, meaning a matter of interest to the public, not just the employee and employer. The employee’s terms and conditions of employment, and speech which is part of the employee’s job duties, are not matters of public interest, for government-employee-free-speech-analysis purposes; pretty much anything else is.

          • For Pete’s sake, what’s the matter of public interest in this case?

            • The distinction is between matters of interest /only/ to the employee and employer (terms and conditions of employment, the employee’s speech undertaken in the discharge of his job duties) and all other speech. What is the matter of public concern in, say, /Fifty Shades of Gray/?

        • Brandenburg v Ohio, US Supreme Court, 1969 found the opposite. There was nothing about the KKK leader’s speech that was in the public interest. Government has a free speech burden that private employers do not have.

  11. As a father of girls and grandfather I would object knowing that my kids’ teacher writes anything in the subject of murder or sex or other such objectionable subjects. This is a quandary. The rest of us may not be teachers, but we may be parents and we write subjects that may be deemed offensive. Does our imagination determine our character or behavior? I wonder if writer teachers should quit being teachers, or write under a pen name? Difficult questions to answer.

    • So if you found out that a teacher was a mystery writer, you’d want that teacher fired, eh? Mystery writers write ‘in the subject of murder or sex’, to say nothing of other ‘objectionable subjects’.

      Nice to know.

      • Tom, I said this is a quandary. There are no easy answers

        • You are right DG. It is a quandary. But what fair minded people and people who believe in justice need to remember is that we cannot always have what we want. We cannot always punish other people simply because we don’t like them or what they think.

          We need grounds for taking action. A justifiable danger in this case.
          I am a father too. But I have little time for out of control outrage. When a man’s career is at stake I believe we need to pause and consider what is real and what is imagined.

          There are two statements in this thread that I find grossly offensive – and offensive far beyond the contents of this teacher’s book.

          Without meaning to disrespect the authors of these statements …

          Kat wrote: “He can have whatever asshat opinions he wants but with his avowed penchant for ogling cleavage he should be allowed no where near underage teenage girls,”

          Dan wrote: “The problem is that if the school waits until the guy acts on his viewpoints, it may lead to irreparable damage to a kid.”

          These two statements scare me and I cannot believe anyone in modern America would believe them. In the first case 99% of all hetero men love to ogle cleavage. In the second case this is the deep dark well of the thought police. If this man was a pedophile and expressed pedophile views then he would be a danger. This man has bizarre personal opinions and has clearly some prejudices about women, views in common with quite a large proportion of men, sadly. But his ‘thought’s’ are his own business and unless there is evidence that he has in the past done anything that endangers women or girls or has tried to spread his views to them, then there is no basis for taking his career away based on what I can see that has been posted on the web about him.

    • Every teacher I know who is a writer (and there are LOTS of them), uses a pen name when writing romance. It’s not that they’re ashamed–or have any reason to be–but it can be a distraction to students. And writing fiction is different than writing the sort of “how to” non-fiction opinion guide this person wrote.

    • As the father of a girl, I find it objectionable when someone writes a crime novel where the protagonist gets raped. I don’t want high school counselors to impart those lessons to high school boys and give them naughty ideas.

      /sarcasm off

  12. Meanwhile, here in Alberta, a teacher has been fired for giving a zero to a kid for not doing an assignment. We’ve got better things to be upset about than this clown.

  13. “I don’t have any problem with someone being fired for their beliefs when you can show that it *has* had an effect on their work.”

    It HAS had an effect on his work. He’s teaching these beliefs. In his own words: “I found myself having to teach women that they do, in fact, have the upper hand,” Craig wrote.

    Not to mention the fact that we are talking about high school kids. Most likely it was a student who discovered the book or if not, one would have sooner or later. That certainly would have affected the job, the kids, the entire school.

    And I’m sorry, but any man who writes this spends ENTIRELY too much time thinking about lady parts. I don’t believe for a second that this man wouldn’t have crossed the line.

    “White women’s vaginal walls are almost exactly regular pink, and the heat value is very average, but usually more moist than others. Asian women have a smaller vagina, which is standard in color. The size of a vagina usually adds to a man’s ego as far as penis size is concerned. Darker black women have hot pink vaginal walls. Lighter black women have lighter pink vaginal walls and they’re typically warmer than that of the darker ladies. Black women in general have more meat surrounding their vagina than other races, which shows more camel toe form with clothes on. Latin women’s vaginal walls are very similar to light-skinned women, but they are much warmer.”

  14. No quandary here. The material of this book makes it quite clear that this guy is a high risk for student abuse. I wouldn’t want him anywhere near my kids.

  15. Curious as to who many of the commentators actually went to Amazon to use the “Look Inside” for this book. From the first couple of pages, it seems the guys is well qualified and quotes like “Women far exceed men in terms of brainpower” don’t seem to have raised.

  16. “Curious as to who many of the commentators actually went to Amazon to use the “Look Inside” for this book. From the first couple of pages, it seems the guys is well qualified”


    Barbra quoted his elegant prose earlier in this thread. It would appear as if you might have missed it. Hence the repeat, for which I apologize.


    “White women’s vaginal walls are almost exactly regular pink, and the heat value is very average, but usually more moist than others. Asian women have a smaller vagina, which is standard in color. The size of a vagina usually adds to a man’s ego as far as penis size is concerned. Darker black women have hot pink vaginal walls. Lighter black women have lighter pink vaginal walls and they’re typically warmer than that of the darker ladies. Black women in general have more meat surrounding their vagina than other races, which shows more camel toe form with clothes on. Latin women’s vaginal walls are very similar to light-skinned women, but they are much warmer.”

    • Wink. I admit that this is – content wise – pretty iffy. Apart from being flat out incorrect (everyone is a different shape – if one need’s to test that, one need only look down and then google), I have no great issue with the structure. Most self-published books and a lot of traditional published books try to give some sexual advice. Just this snippet isn’t enough to really know if it is lame or not. We would need a page or two to really judge.

      I would also mention that if you spend any time around PuA, How to Sex Books, and Relationship Books, you are going to find something similar eventually. The whole human relationship thing is tangled up with all sorts of stuff like this. Heck, there are seminars and workshops on this sort of stuff.

      I would love to see a few more snippets if possible. What other stuff has this guy put out and what’s the context?

      • How about this one? “The easiest kill for a man is through the young lady with low self-esteem,” Craig wrote in the book. “Of course some will feel this is taking advantage, and yes it is.” Because yeah, a girl with low self esteem NEEDS a jerk who’ll treat her badly. He talks about men submitting to a “woman’s power” but he really wants to teach women to submit to men.

        Or how about “All men and women should be sexually promiscuous before getting married” Do you want a guidance counselor or coach teaching that to your kids of either gender?

        How about this: Later in the book, Craig gets personal, writing that a woman he loved in college got pregnant, miscarried the child, and then told him she was cheating on him. “From that moment forward, I vowed to never be put in that situation, and to mind-f— every woman I could,” Craig wrote.

        Because yeah, I want a mind who’s stated intent is to mind f— every woman to be teaching young women about femlae strength and empowerment.

        Or how about this charming quote?: In the final chapter, Craig encourages readers to enter the “wonderful world of submissiveness.” “He’s your man, go ahead and let him turn you every which way, let him touch your hair if he asks, real or not,” Craig wrote. “Give him oral sex without making the ‘ugh’ face.”

        All quotes from this article: http://posttrib.suntimes.com/photos/galleries/14860018-417/hs-girls-hoops-coach-put-on-leave-after-penning-graphic-book-on-sex-women.html

        Still want him around your teenage daughter?

  17. Short Summary:
    - Guy has bad career and opinion choices.
    - Book is ok.
    - Some content may be bad.
    - Reviews could be fake.
    - Primary view is women should be more empowered through logical and emotional thinking.

    Extended Post:
    I want to step in here. When I read the article (just PG’s cut), I also had a response. First, I saw a teacher who has perhaps been wronged or perhaps been given correct treatment for his views. Second, I wondered if my evaluation was true. What I realized is I don’t believe he should have been fired, I am a man and I, hence, tend to be supportive of other men.

    Looking at the facts:
    - He likes breasts. Basically, it depends on your level of sexual openess, but both men and women like breasts. Babies like breasts. Teenagers of both sexes obsess over them. Hence, a normal comment, but I think we should all agree that as a councilor and a teacher, he should have kept that to himself.
    - He works at a strip club as a bouncer. Certainly there is the suggestion of anger issues and relationship issues. Perhaps he needs some help, but I see no problem with the bouncer issue, just that it is at a strip club. Society is not ready for teachers to take of their clothes for money or for teachers to protect those that do. There’s no surprise in the school’s reaction here as this is something one would anticipate from a conservative school operation.

    Now, to his book:
    1) Nice cover.
    2) Well formated.
    3) Editor’s note, so edited.
    4) No spelling mistakes in the first few pages.
    5) Reads well and nice writing style.

    A few statements about him:
    - He used to work as an inpatient shrink at a mental health unit.
    - He often needed to help woman retake their power as women.
    - He is very clear that blaming a man for one’s relationship problems is not a good plan for recovery. Owning your problems is a known treatment and allows acceptance and moving on (which is a core stratergy in relationships).
    - He is certified in multiple areas as a shrink: Gang, Parent Empowerment, so on.
    - He suggests often that woman are powerful beings and can quite easily out wit men.
    - He recognizes women’s emotional leanings and suggests that when mixed with logical thinking can be very empowering.
    - He encourages women to be strong and utilize all of themselves to solve their problems.
    - He offers a road map for WOMEN to have the upper hand in relationships. (The truth is with a suitably skilled man a woman can be at a severe disadvantage. He is evening this by letting them in on how things work behind the scenes from his perspective.)
    - He openly admits women shouldn’t take men’s bad behaviour. I imagine he is going into boundaries and so on after that.

    This man writes well and I have no issue with his work. I see a good book, marketed towards women, and aiming to help rather than hinder. (Note: I didn’t read more than the sample. There certainly is some talk about parts of it, but with every review mentioning some part of the current issues we are seeing, it is hard to say whether they are bad reviews or ‘we don’t like you’ reviews. Certainly the teacher issue could draw that out.)

    I also see a man who had a second occupation and some views that are not conductive to what society’s expectations are for a teacher in terms of morals and activities. Does he deserve to be punished for them? It’s not our place to decide. The school board holds that right and he holds the right to defend himself. With the public backlash, it wouldn’t surprise me if they fired him off completely. The public view is often much more important than facts in these sorts of situations. This is especially true as he is a male working with young females. It would certainly be different if he was a woman (in my personal opinion).

    My conclusion is that he will return to work or change jobs. He’ll lay low for a month or so and it will all blow over. This really isn’t a huge thing, but the media and we are making it one.

    • You do NOT teach women self-empowerment by telling them to learn to provide oral sex without making the ‘ugh’ face.

      His target audience is supposed to be women. His sales technique is apparently to p*** them off. Good luck with that.

      • Word to that. The “ugh” face means they don’t want to do it. It’s far from empowering for women to to have sex they don’t want with men they’re not attracted to.

        • I don’t believe that is what it means at all. In sex, people often do things for their partners that they themselves don’t overwhelmingly enjoy. Men giving oral sex for example, and women the same. Doing it anyway can be a loving and generous thing, though not when done with an ‘ugh’ face ……..

    • An excellent summary Jack. I find his views on women’s role not that different from the Bible’s. There are national organisations that support women’s submission to their men. Apart from his bizarre beliefs on women’s bodies he seems to be trying to help women assert themselves and take control of their lives.

    • Jack, you said:

      “I am a man and I, hence, tend to be supportive of other men”

      Really? Because I am a woman and I, hence, tend to be supportive of other people.

      A teacher supposedly acted inappropriately and that teacher was fired. Why is this being made an issue of gender? Why should people’s opinions about the situation change based on the gender of the people involved?

      Seems to me, there’s a fair amount of sexism on this thread and it really bothers me.

      • Hi Mira,

        First, good question. It’s both challenging and interesting to consider. I’m not sure if you’re going to love my answer, but my opinion is that the book he wrote is about gender (relationships specifically between women and men). He is being punished for being a man who wrote about certain things that society and, most certainly women, find offensive (the obvious example being the color of a woman’s vagina and temperature). I, personally, think that if a woman wrote this book in a similar situation to him then the result would be different. She would be considered weird rather than a potential sex offender. As a man I hold a distaste for this kind of sexism. Therefore, as a man, I support my gender when it is reasonable to do so. A woman would do no less for her sisters in life.

        Now, do I support him still? When I wrote the above I did. After looking up some examples of content, I’m not so sure. He needs to show me evidence that his morals are of a standard that I can respect. As there is so much quoting and so little actual talk about the remainder of the book, I am withholding support, for now.

        My opinion is that it is acceptable and not sexist to support a man in a difficult situation if one is a man because one understands and can truly respect such a man’s situation (the above is a perfect example of man vs society and a man being punished for his gender – common among male teachers specifically.) I feel his pain. It is hard and I can only be empathetic.

        Also note that I would give a woman the same support, but she would not be able to plan the man and man empathy card with me. She would need to earn my support through a show of good faith that she is being trodden on for her gender.

        Perhaps, in hindsight, what I feel is ‘empathy’. That feeling holds no sexism, even if it may seem by my words and acts that it is so. The underlying emotion is quite different. Can you see what I mean, Mira?

        However, my question for you is would you feel the same if it was not a male we are discussing together, but a female? Would you be more or less supportive if so?

        As for oral sex, he is correct on the ugh face issue. If a woman is aparting such a heavenly gift on a man, it is hurtful to a man’s desire and a degradation of the value of the gift if a woman shows distaste such that it is obvious. It is like saying, “Here is a gorgeous rose, my love”, while looking like one wants to hurl. Feelings can only be hurt and the relationship must suffer from such a disregard for one’s lover’s feelings. Thus, a woman should just refrain from such a gift to a man. It is much more respectful to say that one does not wish to for personal reasons of taste (honesty being essential to a good relationship) than to soldier on and believe that a gift can be given with a scornful look of disgust on one’s face. We might also say that if a gift of oral sex is given by man or woman then the importance of apparent enthusiasm is essential. Both men and women owe their partners at least 5 minutes of that. It is the least a man can do for his lover or a woman for hers for all the care and love they provide.

        Forcing is not acceptable, by the way, but convincing over time and the changing of beliefs mixed with non-judgemental beliefs is perfectly fine.

        Thanks for reading,


        • Jack, sorry for the delay in my response.

          Feeling empathy and loyalty for those who are like you, but not for those who are different from you is one of the prime ingrediants for discrimination.

          You can take it further. Those who are of your color get your loyalty first. Your social class. Your age. The level of education. Your intelligence level. In the end, I think there will be about five people on the planet who earn your loyalty, and everyone else is different.

          To take this even further, what you are clearly saying is that this case would bother you more if the children potentially being place in jeopardy were male.

          And if a female teacher was moonlighting as a stripper, and wrote a book comparing male gentialia by race, of course she would be fired. And the decision would be much less controversial.

          • Obviously common sense and rational analysis is a part of this. Thanks for replying and I enjoyed talking with you. I think I’m going to agree to agree somewhat and disagree elsewhere.

            Also, apologies for not checking in. I’ve been pretty busy myself!

  18. In highschool, I was taught that all men were potential rapists and that all men benefited from the fear that induced in women. We did not discuss the scientific methods used to come to some of the conclusions in the book (bonus points to those who knows the book), nor did we discuss any differing views on the matter. It was taught as fact.

    Despite the controversial nature of the book then (the 80′s for me) and now, we all survived and no one lost their job. There wasn’t even a big fuss because most of the people running the department (social studies), in power at the school, and in power on the board of education, took the conclusions in the book as fact.

    We survived.

    In this case, the counselor in question has not been accused of teaching his controversial opinions. There is no evidence, as far as I can tell, that even points to him bringing his opinions into his job. But, he has been forced to resign as a coach and, it looks like, he will lose his job as a counuselor.

    All because his opinions fall outside of what many people involved believe to be the correct way of thinking.

    So–let’s ask ourselves “what if”:

    - He was a member of a religious group that believed the theories he expressed.
    - He was a woman who wrote the same book.
    - He was a woman who wrote the same book and flip-flopped each stereotype (male to female, female to male).
    - He wrote a book on the virtues of being gay.
    - He wrote a book on the virtues of being straight.
    - He wrote a book arguing against/for global warming and was a biology teacher.
    - He wrote the book under a pen name and got “outted.”
    - He and his partners were polyamorous and open about it.
    - He believed that being a virgin until marriage was morally right and wrote an editorial that declared those who engaged in pre-marital sex as “evil.”
    - He was a devout creationist/evolutionist and wrote extensive articles on the subject.
    - He wrote fictional books in which he, clearly, had to imagine new and creative ways to kill people and dispose of bodies.

    All of those things would be opinion and, yet, all of them could cause community outrage, especially in academic circles. Must he suppress his personal opinions to keep his job as a counselor?

    It is easy to say that because he offends people, he is unfit. Says who? It is easy to say he is a danger to his pupils…just like the teacher with PTSD? Or the one with that gun collection? Or the one that wears the Che’ tee-shirts? Or the one with the weird eyes that just scream “serial killer!”

    Puhlease. Call me when the real danger happens.

    Men think about cleavage. Duh.
    Women have been known to use a man’s lust to get their way. Not all, but some (many?). I have been victimized myself and not always unknowingly.
    People sometimes come away from bad relationships with illogical prejudices toward the opposite sex. Raise your hand if you have never been in that situation.
    Women are smarter than men. Thank you, Captain Obvious.
    Men and women sometimes struggle over power in a relationship. Jerry Sienfeld would agree (“but I had hand!”).
    Some men treat women badly (most?). I think we all already knew this.
    The differences in female anatomy. Try as I might, I have never been able to make such in-depth studies so I cannot speak to the accuracy…I just wonder why it was important?

    No one has the right to not be offended. Does he offend some? Sure. Does he offend most? Maybe. Does he offend everyone? Nope.

    You all can argue over the legal issues here. Certainly, the courts will be be involved soon enough. For me, I will ponder right and wrong–and I just cannot justify a person losing their livelihood over their personal opinions when there is no evidence that those opinions negatively effected anyone else.

    Oh, and any time someone says it is “for the children,” my BS antenna goes up. Thank you, George Carlin.


  19. C.S., of course all men are potential rapists (as are all women, actually) and yes, men definitely benefit from the fear this induces in women. They benefit personally and institutionally, and if you want me to go get some supporting data, I’d be happy to begin linking things.

    I do feel abit sympathetic, because I think men are also oppressed and that tends to get over-looked, but I’m also abit tired of men stating that sexism and sexual oppression of women does not exist. People who would never dare, in a million years, to tell a person of color that rascim does not exist, argue freely about sexism, deny its existence and/or try to act as though women speaking up for their rights oppresses them.

    This case is, actually, a legal issue. It has to do with whether a school has the right to fire someone who violates their employment contract. In the U.S., where this happened, it is written into teachers contracts that they must maintain certain standards of behavior, and those are usually spelled out in detail, as per lawyer advice re. hire packets. I would guess the school felt they were on solid ground; it’s not always easy to fire a teacher.

    If you’re arguing whether this guy has a right to write a book entitled: “It’s all her fault”, of course he does. No one is stopping him from writing a book. He just doesn’t get to work in a place where he violates his contract.

    If he wants to find a school that will hire him as a girl’s coach and let him moonlight as a stripper and write controversial books about how he is tired of hearing women complain, that details different types of vaginas and advises women not to make the ‘ugh’ face during oral sex, then more power to him.

    • As you are tired of people denying that some sexism still exists, I am tired of being accused of crimes that I have never committed nor even contemplated. I was not alive when many of the injustices occurred so how much should I pay for them?

      If everyone is oppressed, if everyone is a victim, then none of us is special. I can live with that.

      On the other hand, I don’t defend the guy. I have only read the sample. The, errrm, body part thing is plain strange. I just don’t denounce him either because it is only his opinion. And I am only willing to convict on actions, not opinions.


      • C.S., although everyone is oppressed, some are more oppressed than others.

        And if you are asking for understanding for your situation, it would be wise to give it to others.

        Also, although everyone is oppressed, most people are also part of a group that oppresses. If you are a member of a class of people who oppresses others – not in the past, currently – my belief is you are morally obligated to be aware and awake to that.

  20. “I’m also abit tired of men stating that sexism and sexual oppression of women does not exist.”

    Mira, (keyboard locked and loaded:)

    Sheesh…I’m beginning to believe that some men in the USA are living in the 1950′s. When some of the boneheads speak, whenever I can bear to listen to the excrescence, I hear exactly the same carp I was listening to way back then.

    A geezer I know on Twitter, and hitherto had regarded with respect, said, (and I quote,) “What, touching a breast, sexual assault, give me a break.”

    I hear men talk in GA, and I think to myself, “Hah, try that line in Europe and you’ll get a slap.” I am amazed, because you’ve allegedly had feminism here for 60 odd years. According to what I see, it doesn’t seem to have touched some men, gone in one ear, and didn’t stop.

    I cannot believe the attitudes clearly displayed by this neanderthal of a guidance adviser/games teacher are not utterly reviled by every person who read them. They are repellent, and show nothing other than a complete disregard and lack of respect for HALF THE HUMAN RACE.

    While I have been fascinated by this thread, I am also appalled. There is NO justification for the way this man thinks. He’s a prat, and utterly beneath contempt.


    • It’s not sexual harassment if a gentleman has romanced her sufficiently. To not touch might frustrate her and a man should never frustrate a woman or women if she does not enjoy it. Still, perhaps your friend was referring to a ‘cold man’s touch’? A street grab of bouncing flesh from an unwilling victim or, perhaps worse, an unwilling wife long past the days of seduction? If so there is confusion in this man. He is engaging in SEXUAL ASSAULT! That’s been around since day one – from both sides…

      (Not disagreeing here, just trolling mainly.)

    • Brendan – thank you for this.

      And, yes, it’s sad, but there’s been alot of backlash in the States toward Feminish. It’s even become a stigmatized word, associated with ‘man-hating’. Such a shame.

      But the pendulum will swing again. :)

  21. I find myself infinitely amused by the so-called-gentleman calling me out and attempting to educate me on the fact that heterosexual men enjoy ogling cleavage, and my objection to having an avowed ogler teaching young women. I like men. And I recognize that they ogle. However, I’ve worked in male-dominated fields most of my life and ogling was never acceptable on the job (ok, back in the bad old days, a sergeant felt fine commenting on the length of my skirt and a prospective employer thought it was ok to ask me, as a single mother, what my childcare arrangements would be (and it was a legal question then)–thank God thhose days are gone). I would hope that a man of the 21st century would recognize that ogling is an inappropriate workplace activity, and that young women today should NOT be trained in how to use their “wiles” to get a man (because you know, getting a man is not the key to a woman’s happiness–being a fulfilled human being is. Oddly enough, many men find a happy, successful woman to be incredibly enticing, even lacking pronounced cleavage).

    And I’m a huge free speech advocate. Obviously, any danged fool is allowed to say any stupid thing they want. So how about this for reasons this man should have been fired: lack of good judgement (he published a book that could put his career at risk without apparent consideration of consequences and did so with no attempt to disguise his name), lack of professionalism (the opinions he expressed are disrespectful not only to his students but also to his female teaching associates; it is safe to extrapolate that he acted on the belief structure he advocates in his book), poor impulse control (demonstrated by his avowed promiscuity), and potential anger management issues, as demonstrated by his remarks that working as a bouncer lets him blow off steam and be nicer to his wife, the implication being that if he doesn’t get to hit somethhing on a regular basis, the “something” might be his wife.

    I have no objections to him writing whatever he wants. But there are consequences.

    • I wonder though, much like you are here. Were those things in the book? There is so much talk, but could it all be something else? Misinformation? Sensationalism?

      Anyway, I agree on work place behaviour. Men AND women need to be sexually respectful, unless there is clear interest there on both sides. However, young women (clearly 18 or over, below is a young girl) should be aware of their femininity. Often our mothers and fathers are underqualified to teach a lady how to express her desires at their peak, such as flirting, teasing men (verbally), negging, and holding spicy conversation. They are usually poor examples as well. Of course, turning to friends is an option, but they are floundering as well with this skill set. Books hold the most refined knowledge, but I would opt for something better than this man’s work. Oprah provides a good list to get started and there are Amazon’s lists.

      Inevitably, if a man or woman cannot perform socially at a level suitable to their desired partner then they will fail. Men are often so much more proactive on this, but women have a deep responsibility here too. A woman will not be able to attract a stallion of a man if she is barely a mare herself. Perhaps a woman who lacks wiles may be satisfied with a draft horse? I say no. A woman should find the most suitable mate for her. Base skill is not enough in many cases. Find a better book and find a better man or woman. That is my opinion here.

      Anyway, I’m in no way adding to the conversation here. You will have to excuse me.

      • Rarely does a feminist writer contribute much to this kind of subject but Camille Paglia has written some excellent pieces on this whole topic.

    • When someone says something along the lines of, “I believe in free speech, but…”…that usually means they don’t actually believe in free speech.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Page optimized by WP Minify WordPress Plugin