my point is not about singer's reasoning here
rather if academic philosophy is to be anything other than self-contained exercise then philosophers need to be taken seriously by nonphilosophers
which is difficult as i have explained
Why should Singer have to consider the opinions of someone who clearly hasn't read, or if they have they haven't understood, what he's saying?
Besides, his ideas are controversial amongst philosophers (actually, pretty much all philosophical ideas are controversial but many of his especially so) so it seems a bit strange that your guidance counsellor focussed on him as representative of philosophy. If you'd said you wanted to go into politics would he have said "what, like Richard Nixon?" You could take your pick of dodgy politicians but the point applies.