Modified slightly from what Crotalus said almost three years ago…
If anti-gun people think guns are penis substitutes then that must mean they wish to be castrated.
Having grown up on a farm I have some experience with this task. I’m willing to donate a few hours of my time to servicing these needs for the Brady Campaign, the Violence Policy Center, and the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. If they would coordinate their schedules such that I would only have to make one trip to D.C. we could get this taken care of by Christmas. Think of this as an example of my willingness to work together with my political opponents and compromise on common sense solutions.
Of course the antis’ message is that they have ample penises, and therefore they don’t need guns like we (having small or no penises) need guns.
This of course requires a consideration of the penis as a weapon. The problem there of course is that penises are rarely if ever used in self defense, unless by “self defense” we mean procreation. “Stop or I’ll shoot!” I believe is far more effective in deterring a physical attack than “Stop or I’ll procreate!”
The first I recall this idiotic penis reference was back in the 1970s when the radical feminist, man-hating lesbian movement was in full bloom. There were songs on the radio equating men with everything we’re supposed to hate about capitalists (“capitalist” pronounced in a contemptuous, spitting tone) and about “[you expect me to] make a dress out of a feedbag, and a man out of you, ’cause I’m a woman– W. O. M. A. N…” It was a new Arlo Guthrie style music genera for communist man-haters and it was very popular in Moscow, Idaho back then. It was at that time that anything associated with masculinity came under attack as a symbol of everything that was supposedly wrong with America. Things like sports cars, 4 x 4 pickups, guns, et al became upheld as penis replacements. You wife was supposed to get so sick and tired of you and your sickening, purely destructive male-ness that she would leave you for a woman.
I suppose that the movement, whacked out as it was (and is) did have some success, because we’re still dealing with its influence. The lefties in media of course glommed onto it like flies on a turd, so that helped it a lot. Movies like Diary of a Mad Housewife and Nine to Five helped cement the anti masculinity bigotry into our culture (strength is the enemy, remember) and naturally the anti gun rights movement is only too happy to play along, no matter that it’s as stupid as stupid gets.
The snark is strong with this one…
I think that in many cases, the real issue isn’t penis length so much as it is masculinity. Leftists can’t help but notice that they have deficiencies in the latter department, and that gun owners by and large do not have those deficiencies. Thus they attempt to diminish the masculinity of gun owners by claiming (from a safe distance) that their superior masculinity doesn’t count, because their penises are small.
And yes, gun owners are more masculine than the screaming Mimis of gun control. That includes female gun owners, most of whom don’t look the least bit masculine.
Also, consider the source. These people are the fringe of a fringe, trapped in an early 1990’s time warp. They are saying the same things they said then, and because they live in the most regressive neighborhoods in the most regressive cities in America, they haven’t gotten the word yet that they are out of touch. An Alabama segregationist might have said in 1950 that allowing black integration would lead to Communism, and had others who agreed with that ridiculous notion; but by 1980 he would have had to conclude, just from watching the CBS evening news, that that had not happened, and if he didn’t, his friends would have lost respect for his grasp of reality. The gun control nutjobs, in contrast, have kept reading the same dying newspapers and watching the same dying networks while the nation has passed them by, so they can still make the same non sequitur arguments and have all five of the other gun control nutjobs agreeing with them.
To put it more briefly: the New Media has made it easier for the truth to win out among the majority, but it has also made it possible for the most deluded to cling to their delusions forever, isolated from reality and sanity.
Just a point of fact: A penis isn’t a set of testicles. Castration doesn’t remove the penis, but the gonads. So for Joe’s illustration to be more correct, he’d have to be saying that the anti-gunners are actually wanting to be male>female transgender surgery recipients. Not sure what the female anti-gunners want. Maybe a brain.
It is kind of funny though that many of the same folks who preach about inclusiveness, presumably abhor racism, homophobia, and “hate crimes” of all sorts show their true stripes when it comes to guns and gun owners. Then out come the penis statements and the chicken-shit comments that generally invoke violence of some sort on gun owners. Too bad they never come out to the range to spout off.
…and they call us unsophisticated and disgusting?
So, when they haul out these kindergarten comments, we can all see their issue of projection.
I don’t play that game. When Markley’s Law obtains, I prefer instead to go all Peewee Herman on them, with the rejoinder, “I’m rubber and you’re glue, that bounces off me and sticks to you.” Then while they sit there all confused, I gracefully exit the scene…..
@Defens, Yeah. I know. I considered offering a “penidictomy” or whatever the proper word would be but then I couldn’t leverage my farm experience in the post.
My thought was that even though it was lacking in terms of strict accuracy it was better from a snark perspective.