Anti-Gun Propogandist Criticizes Jodie Foster in "The Brave One"

[Soybomb]

Is the author suggesting that women are incappable of using guns for self defense? I've seen too many women shoot to believe that is true. What a demeaning statement about women!

Thats certainly the way I read it as well. I'd love to see women swamp them with letter about how they don't appreciate the sexist notion that they're incapable of using a tool for self defense.

 

[ArcherandShooter]

Calling BS

You just don't "get it".

Feminists don't WANT anybody to shoot a rapist, either before, during, or after the crime.

Live rapists allow millions of self-righteous victims to march, hold candle-light vigils, and protest in their sanctified victimhood.

That is so much more important than a few women who get raped and strangled.

This is one of the most offensive pieces of CRAP I've ever read. Sure, there are nut-case feminists who will exploit violence against women for political ends once it happens, but to posit that they WANT it to continue happening would be risible were it not so malodorous.

Feminists don't have to go fishing to find examples of misogynistic violence - there are more than enough low-life scum who think that having a pair means they can do what they d**n well like with any woman they want. There's no need to manufacture more incidents than happen every day already.

 

[ArfinGreebly]

Assured Victims

My experience leads me to conclude that there are some sick bastiges out there who NEED victims.

Kind of in the same way that certain cancer researchers NEED for cancer to remain unsolved, because if anyone ever develops a cheap, reliable cure, they're out of a job.

Pretty sick.

I've met some.

We've seen authors state that "more kids will need to die" before we get decent gun control laws. Yeah, he "doesn't want" kids to die. But he NEEDS them to die.

Pretty sick.

And there are people who "don't want" to see women victimized . . . but they NEED for them to be victimized.

See a pattern?

They NEED victims or they're out of a job.

And, while the generality "feminists" cannot be said to "all" need victims, there is certainly a politically driven subset of that group that does.

They're not alone.

The mentality that people must be "cared for" rather than allowed to run their own lives isn't unique to one activism or another: it's a broader phenomenon with many faces.

Let us not forget that the people we call "antis" are just another face of this.

Individual liberty scares them to death. It denies them power. It makes them responsible for themselves, and they're really not up for that.

Don't be misled by the label on the face you're seeing.

 

[ArfinGreebly]

The Actual Review

I wish I could go through the article and pick out the two or three points that hurt the cause of women's equality.

No luck.

There are simply too many points to debunk.

First the "2007 Small Arms Survey" to set the stage (we have too many guns).

Then:

Women and men don't own or use guns equally and sticking one in our hands doesn't give us equality.

No?

I would suggest it goes a long way toward establishing equality in terms of physical force.

To put it simply, most homicides are men going out and killing other men.

As though that were the proper purpose of guns.

The overwhelming majority of the women incarcerated for killing men had been battered by those men, according to Free Battered Women, the San Francisco advocacy group. Most of these women in prison for homicide had only one victim, the abuser.

Women are victims.

"The Brave One" also bolsters the myth that women can use guns--as the National Rifle Association Web site puts it--for "personal safety strategies" and "refusing to be a victim."

Nothing could be further from the truth. Women have been further endangered rather than protected by the proliferation of handguns.

Women are victims.

When women do purchase handguns, they use them on themselves more often than on anyone else.

According to the Washington-based anti-gun Brady Campaign, regions with higher levels of handgun ownership by women correspond to higher suicide rates for women.

Guns are bad.
Women are victims.

Although women have higher rates of depression than men, it is the handgun-suicide connection--rather than depression--that accounts for higher suicide completion rates.

Women are victims.
Guns are bad.

. . .

And so on, and so on.

And then, this:

Or maybe a big budget update of "Lysistrata," the Aristophanes play about women who withhold sex from their husbands to stop the Peloponnesian War. That would be really scary.

Sex is how women control men.

But remember, women are victims, so it's okay.

Conclusion?

She (the author) NEEDS women to be victims.

Guns will take that away from her. Guns are bad.

She is EXACTLY one of the "sick bastiges" I mention above.

 

[cnorman18]

waynesan, thanks for your response

I appreciate your reply.

I don't think either of us, at bottom, really cares very much what any Hollywoodite has to say about guns, and Jodie Foster is no exception. My only beef here was that it seemed pretty clear that she was giving a personal view and not attempting to make a political statement (she explicitly said that) nor join in any kind of campaign.

In any case, it sounds like her new movie does more to help our side than otherwise. I look forward to seeing it.

I wish she'd gain some weight, though. The woman is too damned THIN.

 

[ilcylic]

Travis Lee: I think you've made a mistake in attributing this mindset to "feminists" as a blanket group. The base definition of a feminist is "someone who believes women are equal to and as important as men, as human beings", and that's something I can get behind.

Now, just like we have problems here in our own little group of pro-gunnies, Niven's Law applies to feminists, too. "No cause is so noble it will not attract ****heads." So, sure, some feminists--and in today's TV obsessed culture, usually the loudest ones--probably are so psychopathic as to believe in Stalin's "breaking eggs to make omelets". But most of them aren't, and calling that sort of evil down on an entire group is no more appropriate when it's feminists, than when the mass media paints us all with the same brush they use to get Cho, or Harris and Kleibold.

 

[Mannix]

editted due to inability to keep it highroad... I think I need to take a little walk.



All I gotta say is, what a load of dung.

 

[ROMAK IV]

I agree! The stance in that article seems very "unfeminist". As men, we are constantly criticized by feminists for being fearful of "strong women", like, supposedly Hillary Clinton, but the feminists that are more socialistic aren't really feminist. Such is the case with the writer. "Women can't use guns", uter nonsense! My very "unfeminist" grandmother could use a gun, could hunt, and knew how to prepare game and poultry. The current crop of pretend feminists are wimpy socialists who whine about motherhood being akin to slavery, have a patholigical fear of guns, and want the federal government to replace the husband or father that they shun. This is the overall tone of the piece.

More specifically, it is erroneous and like most antigun rhetoric purposely intended to mislead. I haven't seen the movie, so I can't comment on the character being a "vigilante". Perhaps that is only an interpretation. No. I wouldn't expect most women to become vigilantes, but comparing THAT to women defending themselves with firearms is very misleading.

I also take exception to the equally dishonest practice of anti-gunners to lump criminal behavior and legitimate behavior together. But this is intentional!!! The infamous "kellerman report" was almost exclusively about criminal and crime victims, that's why its conclusions are invalid. Almost ALL murders are committed by individuals with a criminal history. Almost all firearms accidents involve the same individuals with criminal or drug abuse backgrounds. Thus, in discussing women using guns defensively and legally, those statistics are irrelevant.

Another problem is phoney connections between guns and suicides of women. Women don't often use firearms to commit suicide, so I would like the author to explain to me, how the simple presence of a gun causes more suicides. I haven't seen the study, but I would bet that it is similiar to the Kellerman report, where factors like criminal history and drug abuse are ignored as causes for homicides, and only the gun is relevant.

The last major problem occurs with defensive gun uses. Using a gun in self defense, potentially saves the life of the potential victim, but it more than often saves the life of the criminal as well. The prevented murder or the prevented justifiable homicide can't be counted. It is easy to see why: the criminal sees the armed citizen and flees the scene, and the crime doesn't occur. The criminal lives to either change his criminal operations or looks for an antigun feminist to victimize. The potential victim doesn't shoot the criminal in the back, because it is illegal and he trys to abide by the law.

 

[Henry Bowman]

SM, there is a world of difference between sweet sheltered ladies who couldn't recognize evil when it stared them in the face, and women who WANT TO SEE WOMEN RAPED so they can have victims to parade around.

Not even close.

You just don't "get it".

Jan and Steve, I think you are both wrong to some degree -- or, more likely, just missing each other's point in cyberspace.

Feminists don't WANT anybody to shoot a rapist, either before, during, or after the crime.

Live rapists allow millions of self-righteous victims to march, hold candle-light vigils, and protest in their sanctified victimhood.

That is so much more important than a few women who get raped and strangled.

Travis Lee: I think you've made a mistake in attributing this mindset to "feminists" as a blanket group. The base definition of a feminist is "someone who believes women are equal to and as important as men, as human beings", and that's something I can get behind.

Bingo! The mistake was equating "feminist" with "antigun zealot." Your brush was both too broad and off target.

Now can we all just calm down and communicate on topic?

 

[Red Dragon]

When women do purchase handguns, they use them on themselves more often than on anyone else.

According to the Washington-based anti-gun Brady Campaign, regions with higher levels of handgun ownership by women correspond to higher suicide rates for women.

Although women have higher rates of depression than men, it is the handgun-suicide connection--rather than depression--that accounts for higher suicide completion rates.

I found this to be an odd statement. I am not much of a believer in statistics but in both MP school and my criminal justice classes I read that methods of suicide by women tend to be "less violent" or "less painful" (ingesting pills, slicing the wrist, carbon monoxide poisoning, etc.) when compared to methods more often used by men (jumping off a tall building, firearms, hanging)

 

[Don Gwinn]

Someone had the solution earlier--Mythbusters! Give Kari an airsoft loaded with paintballs and see if Jamie or Adam can take it away and use it on her with, say, 80% reliability. Try it from behind, holstered gun, and then advance to the classic movie "standoff" where the heroine has gun in hand checking out a noise. They could go into a shoot house where the men could surprise her around corners and such if it's too easy for her when she has warning. Does anyone think she wouldn't paint them up?

It might actually be a little too straightforward for TV.

 

[JohnL2]

"The Brave One" also bolsters the myth that women can use guns--as the National Rifle Association Web site puts it--for "personal safety strategies" and "refusing to be a victim."

Myth that women can use guns? Hmmm...

 

[hso]

I'd like to see Julie Goloski, Pax, Springmom and Gunbabe on a panel with Sandra Kobrin and see how she fares.

 

[springmom]

'd like to see Julie Goloski, Pax, Springmom and Gunbabe on a panel with Sandra Kobrin and see how she fares.

Well, she'd sure know she'd encountered a different opinion...

Springmom