“Hoplophobia (n.): The irrational fear of weapons, correctly described by Freud as ‘a sign of emotional and sexual immaturity.’ Hoplophobia, like homophobia, is a displacement symptom; hoplophobes fear their own ‘forbidden’ feelings and urges to commit violence. This would be harmless, except that they project these feelings onto others. The sequelae of this neurosis include irrational and dangerous behaviors such as passing ‘gun-control’ laws and trashing the Constitution.”
— Eric S. Raymond
I was toolin’ around on the interwebs and got up on the Twitters and saw this tweet by conservatarian rock star Dana Loesch:
I want this man to tell the countless females who’ve fended off attackers at gunpoint that they have”tiny penises.”aspentimes.com/article/201212…
— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) December 28, 2012
Well, there’s a classic example of leftist reactionaryism regarding guns and the Second Amendment. Without fail, the author resorts to the tried-and-true tactic of Alinsky-style ridicule by making the assertion “the longer the weapon, the shorter the tool” —meaning: if you own a gun, you have a small penis. I’m not sure how that applies to female gun owners. Perhaps female gun owners have small ovaries? But I digress.
Once again, I believe the author is engaging in psychological projection:
“According to the theories of Sigmund Freud, psychological projection is a psychological defense mechanism whereby one ‘projects’ one’s own undesirable thoughts, motivations, desires, feelings, and so on onto someone else (usually another person, but psychological projection onto animals and inanimate objects also occurs). The principle of projection is well-established in psychology.”
I’ve decided to shred Mr. So Small’s article, which I’ll quote from directly. Let’s just examine the sentiment in the first paragraph:
“Now that we’ve finally decided that we actually can have a conversation about gun control in this country, I think those of us who are in favor of tougher measures have to face one unavoidable truth: Trying to control guns now is a case of shutting the barn doors after the horse gets out.”
We’ve finally decided to have a conversation about guns, huh? I. Did. Not. Know. That. Or was it because the gun control advocates decided they couldn’t let a good crisis go to waste (i.e. Newtown Massacre) and are using a horrific crime to incrementally advance their own anti-gun agenda? Like William S. Burroughs once said, “After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from those who didn’t do it.”
Our gun-hating author goes on to cite the alleged success gun control laws achieved in preventing mass shootings in Australia. This is a popular talking point right now with the anti-gun lobby, by the way. The only problem is Mr. Small fails to point out that gun control has, in fact, been a complete failure in Australia (via Maggie’s Notebook):
After Australia banned and confiscated guns from their citizens, promising them safety in return for their weapons, violent crime dramatically increased:
Armed robbery +69%
Assault with guns +28%
Gun murders +19%
Home invasions +21%
You can view a video of the failure of Australia’s gun control laws here. Additionally, gun control advocates heap praise on the strict gun control laws enacted in the U.K., but, once again, gun crime statistics do not back up their claims.
The author is not so deluded to believe it is realistic that the Second Amendment could be repealed, so he suggests demonizing and marginalizing people who own guns.
“In the absence of a plan to reduce the number of firearms out there, I think the only feasible option is to try to change people’s attitudes toward guns. Right now, for whatever reason, gun owners think of themselves as rugged sportsmen and bold, brave defenders of family, liberty and personal property. Whether that self-image is the least bit true is subject to debate, but I think we can change that view with a little effort.”
So, apparently Mr. So Small believes Americans who exercise their Second Amendment rights see themselves as “rugged sportsmen and bold, brave defenders of family, liberty and personal property.” First off, is that a bad thing? What would the author have us be? Wimpy and weak, haters of family, liberty and personal property? I would say, “Yes!” Well, whatever he thinks, he obviously believes he can change it with a “little effort.”
At this point in the article, our gun-hating author really starts to trot off into the giggleweeds of presumptuous pomposity:
“Do you remember a few years ago when people were buying millions of Hummers? To me, those Hummer owners were a lot like gun owners. They had an inflated sense of their own self-importance, and they thought owning a massive tank-like vehicle made them somehow more virile and masculine. Then the rest of us pointed out that owning a Hummer was an obvious sign of a person making up for a physical shortcoming, and Hummer went out of business virtually overnight.“
I did not know that! Did you know that? I did not know owners of Hummers were really making up for their own insecurities by buying big honkin’ Hummers. Apparently it made them feel more “virile and masculine.” But, according to Mr. So Small, once the Hummer owners were enlightened to the fact that the progressives of the earth saw right through their charade of male chauvinism, “Hummer went out of business virtually overnight.”
Our gun-fearing author really cranks up the hoplophobia with his last six paragraphs. No explanation needed here, this garbage speaks for itself (emphasis mine):
So, since I’m not particularly concerned about the National Rifle Association ruining my political career, I’ll be the one to say it: If you own multiple guns or feel the need to possess a military-style assault weapon, it’s because you have a small penis.
Let me clarify that statement a little, if I may. Owning a handgun to protect your home and your family is fine. Owning a rifle or shotgun for hunting or target shooting is also fine. But owning lots of guns or pseudo-machine guns means you have a tiny wiener and you’re incredibly self-conscious about it. That’s the plain and simple truth, even if it’s not true.
Now, I know a lot of you are probably saying to yourselves, “But Todd, plenty of women also own guns. What about them? Do they have small penises, too?”
My answer to that question would be: yes. Yes they do. Women who own assault weapons have tiny penises, just like their male counterparts. That would explain why they’re angry enough to buy a weapon whose sole purpose is to kill as many people as possible as quickly as possible.
To those of you out there who, like me, have had enough of all the shooting and killing in this country, I encourage you to spread the rumor that when gun owners talk about their 9 mms, they’re actually referring to their genitalia and not the caliber of their weapons. With any luck, we can stigmatize gun ownership and encourage people to give up their firearms willingly.
And to those of you out there who own assault weapons or numerous pistols, I encourage you to seek less violent ways to make up for your shortcomings. There are thousands of “natural male enhancement” products out there, and if Austin Powers is to be believed, Swedish-made penis-enlargement pumps might actually work. Give those a try. Surely there’s some product out there that can make up for your puny wiener more effectively than arming yourself to the teeth.
Wow. The lady doth protest too much, methinks.