Why are some men letting fear stop them from engaging in an honest conversation about the reality of guns in America?
—
In my attempt to come to an understanding as to why so many people oppose and resist common sense firearms safety regulations, I have developed a proposition that regulations on firearms challenge the promises of a patriarchal system based on notions of hyper-masculinity with the elements taken to the extreme of control, domination over others and the environment, competitiveness, autonomy, rugged individualism, strength, toughness, forcefulness, and decisiveness, and, of course, never having to ask for help or assistance. Concepts of cooperation and community responsibility are pushed to the sidelines and discarded.
Recently, to test out my theory, I distributed to a number of Facebook pages my understanding for the reasons why the United States remains among the last of the more developed Western countries to resist instituting meaningful and appropriate firearms safety measures.
Coming from the vast majority of sites devoted to enhancing firearms safety, members responded very positively, as if what I proposed was obvious, as common sense, and as indisputable. Examples of comments I received from these sites included: “Spot on analysis,” “Brilliant!,” “You said something I have been thinking for years, but you articulated it so well,” “Thank you for your clarity,” as well as providing some alternative explanations such as: “Follow the Money. Straight to the NRA from Colt, Remington and Smith & Wesson. It is NOT really about the 2nd Amendment for a ‘well regulated militia’; it is about selling weapons to the market of frightened people.”
I also reached out to other locations where I was less likely of receiving nearly universal support. Among the sites I contacted included members of a pro-firearms anti-regulations Facebook page calling itself Hypocrisy and Stupidity of Gun Control Advocates. By the title of the site, I should have been more prepared for the veracity of responses I received.
◊♦◊
Demographics and Methodology
Following my initial statements on this Facebook page, approximately 120 or so different people responded. From what I could perceive of their genders or gender identities, no one identified as transgender, while only three identified as female. I could not determine the “racial” identities of the respondents since members did not identify in racial terms.
After I downloaded all of the comments, I coded all responses to identify any emerging themes. To my disappointment, but unfortunately not of much surprise, only 4 or 5 of the total number of responders made some form of reasoned or informed points, from wanting to protect their families to, for the women responders, warding off potential rapists. In addition, two made attempts at standing up to restrain the vast majority who responded out of rage and attack. While the upstanders efforts did not prove effective, at least they tried.
For the remainder of the members who posted during this time, rather than discussing or debating, they spewed venomous attacks in the form of name calling, character assassination, and direct threats. I report the forms it took. I have kept the language exactly as responders delivered it. I also include a number of the memes they posted according to the themes that emerged.
◊♦◊
Calling My Masculinity into Question
Most members tapped into the larger societal hierarchy of masculinity in terms of the binary of the “Alpha Male” literally and figuratively on top versus the “Beta Male” on the bottom. According to the definitions on Urban Dictionary:
“Alpha Male”: “1. The leader of the pack/herd/etc. 2. The dominant male, 3. The main source of population.”
I also found the definition of “Alpha Male Syndrome,” which I surmise most members on the Facebook site would not embrace, since it is a “psychological ailment when a guy always has to push or boss others around, start fights, talk shit, makes himself the center of attention, assume responsibility for anyone else’s triumph while also pushing the blame for his fuck-ups onto others.”
“Beta Male”: “an unremarkable, careful man who avoids risk and confrontation. Beta males lack the physical presence, charisma, and confidence of the Alpha male.”
All responses associated with this hierarchy referred to me as “Beta” for the purpose of dismissing anything I have to say. I include only a few representative examples:
- “He’s a beta male = no relevance.”
- “That’s some beta male nonsense right there.”
- “If ever there were a poster boy for beta male…” followed by my Facebook picture with my three dogs:
- In response to my initial posting: “Translation: Yada-yada, buzzword, buzzword, buzzword city, beta male cuckholdry, whining, hail Karl Marx, more yadas and finish off with a death to America.”
◊♦◊
Defense of Hyper-Masculinity:
- “…every one of those [elements of hyper-masculinity that Blumenfeld listed on his initial posting] can be attributed to natural human nature. Take that away, and we’d all be a bunch a limp wristed pussies.”
◊♦◊
Heterosexism & Cissexism
- Again, for the purpose of dismissing me, they referred in negative terms to my sexual identity or my gender expression, which they could easily determine by accessing my Facebook page or by initiating a google search.
- “The only thing missing from his comment is a cute, transparent rainbow over his profile pic.”
- “Fgt” [Faggot]
- “A very learned, articulate, self flagellating fag. Good riddance.” [This posting represents the only complement to my intelligence.]
- “Man this oke right here sounds like he went to a Re-Education Camp. I hope they didn’t cut your balls off Boet.”
◊♦◊
Femininization / Sexism
One of the most exploited ways of degrading males within our overarching patriarchal sexist society is to feminize or demasculinize males. This exposes our society’s blatant and covert forms of misogyny.
- “Warren….Aren’t you late for your bikini wax?”
- “Another liberal dipshit trying to pussify the American male. Go be a hipster somewhere else.”
- “This moron needs to go back to Star Bucks, sip his Latte, and shut his fucking douchey mouth. What a mouth breathing dick bag… Seriously…”
- “Another ‘I’m smarter and more enlightened then you’ liberal douchebag, who’s nowhere near as original as he believes he is. Fuck outta here with that shit.”
- “Wtf [What the fuck] are you people smoking?! I’m an INDIVIDUAL. That’s not negotiable. Shove this leftist/globalist community bullshit back in whatever orifice you dug it out of. Pansy ass apologists are the reason this Country faces destruction from within.”
I observed in many of the respondents’ comments linking feminization and what I thought was the extinct concept of the “hippy.” Also, I see that going to Starbucks also is feminizing.
- “Trying to drop hippy buzzwords like patriarchal and transabled and overly masculin or masculinization or whatever the fuck else is hip right now. Piss off hippy, I discredit you when you when you do this. It truly does make you a regurgibot. That is a robot that regurgitates the bullshit you soak up in the liberal robot factory/marxist indoctrination system such as liberal biased media driven sensationalist clown colleges across North America. Go piss up a rope and let the adults talk you tight pants scarf combo wearing Starbucks loving social experiment.”
◊♦◊
Ableism
- “Translation: I throw out big words to sound intellectual when I’m actually a fucking retard who is beyond help.”
◊♦◊
Dehumanization
I have learned many lessons in my studies of genocides perpetrated throughout the ages. Strong leaders whip up sentiments by employing dehumanizing terminology and images while stereotyping and scapegoating entire groups, while other citizens or entire nations look on, often refusing to intervene. Everyone, not only the direct perpetrators of oppression, plays a vital role in the genocides. On a micro level, this is also apparent, for example, in episodes of schoolyard, community-based, as well as electronic forms of bullying.
A number of respondents represented me in dehumanizing terms. Some represented me as a dog, or attacked my dogs to attack me:
- “Dude looks like he rubs peanut butter on him so his dogs can lick it off.”
- “What did those poor dogs to desreve a complete a idiot?
- “You see dogs, I see snake food.”
- “What dogs? You mean those wussified rats?”
One member literally converted me into a dog:
Many referred to me as a “sheep,” while others distanced themselves from being placed in this category of “sheep”:
- “You’ve strung a bunch of intelligent sounding words together in an attempt to portray yourself as a learned individual, but have merely come across as a pseudo-intellectual sheep.”
- “I’m not a sheep, so no I’m not standing for anymore gun control.”
If members do not consider themselves as Sheep as they “accuse” me, I wonder whether they envision themselves more as Wolves or as Sheepdogs? I ask this after seeing the film, “American Sniper,” in which the protagonist, Chris Kyle (played by Bradley Cooper) remembered something he learned from his father (played by Ben Reed) when he was young:
Wayne Kyle: [to his two sons]: “There are three types of people in this world: sheep, wolves, and sheepdogs. Some people prefer to believe that evil doesn’t exist in the world, and if it ever darkened their doorstep, they wouldn’t know how to protect themselves. Those are the sheep.
“Then you’ve got predators who use violence to prey on the weak. They’re the wolves.
“And then there are those blessed with the gift of aggression, an overpowering need to protect the flock. These men are the rare breed who live to confront the wolf. They are the sheepdog.”
I am assuming that the majority of members on this Facebook page see themselves as “Sheepdogs” as protectors of us flock of sheep. What I experienced, however, was a pack of wolves.
◊♦◊
Threat of Violence:
One of Suzanne Pharr’s common elements of oppression centers on the threat and use of violence by dominant groups who have defined and imposed the social norms upon those who do not or will not conform to these norm. In addition, Iris Marion Young lists “violence” as one of her five “faces” in her taxonomy looking at the common factors involved in privilege and oppression.
- “Warren J. Blumenfeld do the world a favor and go chug some bleach”
- “Die. Just die. Today. Fucking Liberals.”
- “Just yell ‘fuck the a.i.d.s. straight into that little pin dick of yours’. Followed by ‘since I was diagnosed its been forever since I’ve had a good fucking’”.
◊♦◊
Analysis
While most of the respondents claimed their “individuality,” I perceived the opposite. They marched in virtual lock step in attaching me. It was as if they acted in unison like a school of Piranha fish going after an evening meal. After a short while, their names became virtually interchangeable from the words that followed.
Unfortunately, the vast majority of people who responded simply confirmed my initial posting regarding the patriarchal system on which our country persists by exemplifying the notion of the people who want their guns simply because they want their guns, without providing, for the most part, rational justifications. As I have indicated in past commentaries, they echoed one another about a supposed tyrannical government waiting to take away individual freedoms, and about invaders and “aliens” waiting to overrun their space, which only an arsenal of weapons could ever counter. And they asserted that I have the irrational fear of firearms, so-called hoplophobia.
◊♦◊
My final comment on their website included the following:
“As you know, a very contentious debate is currently underway in our country regarding the role and future of firearms. Unless and until you develop substance over bluster, you will ultimately lose the debate since you don’t know how to debate. Currently, you hold the balance of power in the public imagination, but this will be short lived if you don’t revert from attack, threat, and dehumanization of your opponents to informed arguments. In the end, bullying never succeeds in getting bullies what they want.”
—
This post is republished on Medium.
—
Photo credit: Shutterstock
Btw. As an academic I think you’ll be interested in this article descoping the facts of America leading the world’s killings by guns. Doesn’t fit the memes though. Captured by snopes 11/9/15. Not being factual is really one of the greatest crimes against humanity we have today. CLAIM: A meme accurately depicts the rate of firearm-related murders in the United States compared to other countries. MIXTURE EXAMPLE: [Collected via e-mail, October 2015] ORIGINS: On 13 October 2015 the gun control advocacy group Everytown for Gun Safety tweeted the above-reproduced graph that visually contrasts the rate of gun murders in the… Read more »
Mark. It makes sense or not, depending on the goal.
You have a point Warren regarding testosterone fueled commentary but that seems to be de rigeur rather than just about guns. I am a permit carrier. I don’t resonate with ANY of those comments you got. None. Nada. Not one. No aromatics are sold legally. There are no loopholes for gun shows and liberals like to keep portraying this but it simply is not true. Do we need more training and assessment before getting a permit? Perhaps. But those getting them on the street have neither training or assessment. So realistically Warren you’re talking about taking away guns from only… Read more »
Something to consider. 3D printed guns.
http://www.businessinsider.com/i-3d-printed-an-ar-15-assault-rifle–and-it-shoots-great-2013-12
http://gizmodo.com/3d-printed-guns-are-only-getting-better-and-scarier-1677747439?utm_expid=66866090-62.H_y_0o51QhmMY_tue7bevQ.0&utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/191388-1200-the-price-of-legally-3d-printing-your-own-metal-ar-15-rifle-at-home
Why are some men assuming that because others don’t want to have ” an honest conversation about the reality of guns in America” it must be because of some form of psychological pathology and not because these sorts of “honest conversations” amount to a whole lot of partisan gum flapping in which one side wants to “negotiate” away the constitutionally codified rights of another?
OT… Warren, I have to give you credit. Contrary to a recent author, at least you allow us to say what we feel. As much as you get push back from some of us, you’re reasonable when it comes to moderating the responses and from what I’ve experiences, I don’t know of you ever removing them after they’ve been approved and posted. Thank you
Ironic but it looks like my lengthy response got “modded”
Maybe I spoke too soon
It’s interesting that the one thing you have ignored and haven’t researched as all the people calling for more gun control is the number of crimes that have been prevented due to someone having a firearm. You’re being disingenuous at best. This is no different than the gun control supporters narrative of the accidental deaths by firearms. In comparison they are almost non-existent to other forms of accidental deaths starting with those caused by cars.
The laws are all in place.
The number of Americans who own guns and the number of households with guns is decreasing. The total number of guns in America is increasing because the total number of guns owned by individual gun owners is increasing. The gun nuts keep doubling down and buy more and more. It is a fear based industry fed by Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh Et Al. Eventually however just like with Pot and Gay Marriage the people opposing gun control will continue to shrink and become ever more marginalized.
Mike, given that gun ownership is negatively correlated with factors strongly correlated with the likelihood to commit violent crime that’s not a good thing unless you just want to “get those mean old conservative white people.”
Yeah, gun ownership may be down but illegal gun ownership isn’t
Why not pick one or more of the moderate sites? 1mmagc 1mdagc Scope Etc? And, Facebook? Internet anonymity brings out all the keyboard commando’s. You also discount history. It’s well known that to give the anti-gun people an inch, they will attempt to take 5 miles. No one asks us, the pro-Second Amendment folks, what “commonsense” is. You’d rather tell us what your “common sense” approach is, and expect us to accept it as gospel. I’m still waiting for someone to sit down and discuss….really discuss with an open mind…. The issue of guns with us. Not dictate. Compromise works,… Read more »
Of course, you pick one of the more radical pro-gun websites to run your “survey”.
C’mon, you’re not surprised are you?
“Man this oke right here sounds like he went to a Re-Education Camp. I hope they didn’t cut your balls off Boet”
This was quite obviously written by a white South African or someone who claims to be Rhodesian. A dead-end Boer who depended on his white privilege to make up for lack of education and is now SOL since education is required.
Lmaris, yes, but what is a “Boet”? The person did not write “Boer.”
Warren
Citing yourself doesn’t get it.
Women are getting guns to protect themselves. Why do you think women should be unprotected against predators?
A gun controller is one who thinks a woman raped and murdered is morally superior to a woman explaining to the cops how this assailant came by his fatal wounds.
Richard. Where do you see me calling for the banning of guns in this or in any of my other of my articles? I am calling for enhanced regulations designed to promote gun safety. Unfortunately, many pro-gun advocates interpret “regulation” for “confiscation.” I truly don’t understand how you jumped to your conclusions.
“• We must ban and criminalize the possession of automatic and semi-automatic weapons! – ”
What do you propose to do with the people that already own an semi-auto rifle? Confiscation is exactly what you are advocating and you don’t even know it.
” We must ban and criminalize the possession of automatic and semi-automatic weapons!”
Those are your exact words. What do you purpose we do with the people who already own those weapons? You are calling for confiscation and you don’t even know it.
What about the reality of women using firearms to defend themselves? Have you done any articles on this? And what about the dangers of police and Federal Agents using military weapons and hardware against civilians?
Between 2005 and 2011, the percentage of American women who own a gun nearly doubled, rising from 13 to 23 percent, according to Gallup poll data.Oct 1, 2013
According to Gallup … The percentage of women who report household gun ownership is also at a new high, now registering 43%.
“The Obama Administration Justice Department is also not strongly enforcing prosecutions of people who falsify information on their gun background checks. The FBI reported 71,000 instances of people lying on their background checks to buy guns in 2009. But the Justice Department prosecuted a mere 77 cases, or a fraction of 1%. “Enforcing these existing laws is “common sense” and should be the “common sense” measures pursued, has failed to take action. This includes bolt-action, semi-automatic, and so-called “assault rifles” – account for roughly 350 homicides that last few reported years (2.55-2.75% of homicides). Handguns account for nearly half of… Read more »
Tom: Yes, indeed, what you quote has merit, and I agree that we need as a nation to enforce existing laws. However appropriate are the existing laws, though, they are not sufficient to better guarantee firearms safety, and, therefore, tell me why any of my proposals below would not be appropriate as well: • We must ban and criminalize the possession of automatic and semi-automatic weapons! • We must close loopholes such as buying a weapon at a gun show! • We must ban the purchase of firearms and ammunition on the internet! • We must increase the waiting period… Read more »
– I don’t think you know what an “automatic” or “semi-automatic” weapon is. More than half of all guns in the country are “semi-automatic,” and they’ve been around for over a hundred years. You are talking about ALL pistols and revolvers, and many shotguns and rifles that are ordinary and common. – There are no loopholes for buying a gun at a gun show. Every law that applies in a gun shop also applies at a gun show. – It is already illegal to buy a gun on the Internet (or through the mail), and it has been since 1968.… Read more »
@ Kitty Taffer
I used to collect sport cards and comic books so I’m sympathetic to the collector thing, but I suspect that part of the reason might be what happens if the house is burglarized? The criminal element walks away with 100 guns instead of one. You can’t really walk around with 100 guns so the carry people’s argument of if my gun is with me, it’s harder to steal argument is void in that case.
Will these restrictions apply to police and Federal Agents as well?
The government has enough “common sense” laws on the books, why don’t they enforce current laws? People who allow fear to shape their views, are destined to fear whatever do not know anything about.
“fear” stopping them? Cite, please.
Richard, please see:
https://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/gun-control-debate-a-view-from-hoplophiliaville-wcz/