joesalazar

Dangerous Hypocrisy

Wasn’t it just last summer that our friends on the left were up in arms over middle-aged men (specifically, politicians) making statements about rape?  The last few days have been rank with double standards coming from the liberal crowd: personally insulting, misogynistic and just plain alarming comments that have illicited little, if any, outrage from those who claim to be so “pro-woman.” Rep. Joe Salazar, a particular Colorado University, Bob Beckel, and Amanda Marcotte make me fear for the safety of all women of this country.

First, there was Colorado Democrat Joe Salazar. Last week, Salazar argued against conceal and carry on college campuses—a perfectly legitimate opinion, though I disagree. But he argued that firearms for defense are not needed because of call boxes, rape whistles, and safe zones; and women “might feel like [you’re] in trouble when you may actually not be” and might “pop a round” at someone.

I find it insulting that Salazar insinuates that women are too emotionally unstable and generally incapable of responsibly handling a firearm for their own defense against would-be rapists. And further, I find it ridiculous that he believes women should settle for call boxes, rape whistles, and “safe zones” for defense. It’s incredible that one expects women to stand at a call box, blow a whistle, or run to a safe zone (when who knows if, in the situation, any of those would be available) and wait for help when faced with a potentially armed and dangerous attacker. I can’t think of a better way to victimize women than to force them to depend upon someone else to defend them against rapists. Where is the feminist crowd denouncing this kind of helplessness forced upon women?

Then there’s the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs and their inane suggestions to women to prevent rape and sexual assaults. These have since been taken off the UCCS website, but you can find a complete listing of the original suggestions here. Among these suggestions: fake a disease, vomit, urinate, and most ludicrous at all, “passive resistance.” Not only do we have politicians telling us women how we should defend ourselves, but we also have schools telling us that not taking action to defend ourselves might be a legitimate option.

Even the liberal mouthpiece, Bob Beckel had the nerve to claim that rape on college campuses is not a widespread problem. He’s wrong — it is a problem (check out statistics here) and a serious one at that. I would think that the crowd who, during the election, so vehemently led the “war on women” crusade would be all for women empowering themselves effectively against men who want to attack them.

But alas, there’s Amanda Marcotte, whose recent Twitter rampage displayed not only that some individiauls would be better served if they’d never been introduced to social media, but also more animosity for women’s capability of carrying firearms for defense against rape. It defies all logic and reason that some women are actually against defending themselves against attackers in the most effective way. No one in their right mind wants to use a firearm in self defense—but if one’s well being and life are on the line, I cannot fathom the mindset of the individual who literally expects women to remain defenseless instead of taking action to stop an attack.

NewSarahHindsIconI’d like to know two things: Where is the outrage from those who claim to be so “pro-women” in this country? Last summer we couldn’t get through a single political discussion without mentioning Todd Akin or Richard Mourdock’s terribly awkward and odd statements about rape. Women whined and whined that men shouldn’t “tell them what to do with their bodies.” What’s the difference now? If feminists and pro-choice folks don’t like male politicians (or anyone, for that matter) telling them what to do with their bodies in the event of an unwanted pregnancy, why do they comply when they’re told they shouldn’t be able to carry a firearm, an effective means of defense, to protect “their bodies?”

And secondly, why do so many women and so many politicians promote the “my body, my choice” mantra when it comes to aborting unwanted babies, yet when it comes to defending oneself against a rapist, women are told to “passively resist” and that they do not have the choice, nor the capability, to carry a firearm in defense?

It’s hypocrisy at its finest. And unfortunately, it’s hypocrisy that is inherently dangerous to women.

Sarah Hinds | Lindenwood University | @Sarah_Hinds76

Related News

6 Responses

Leave a Reply
  1. Rory
    Feb 24, 2013 - 03:58 PM

    The suggestions on the UCCS website were absurd! But the conservative politicians’ comments that sparked such concern last year were significantly more offensive and scientifically incorrect than Salazar’s. If he was saying that women can’t carry concealed weapons because they’re too emotionally unstable, then that’s ridiculous – but that’s YOU putting words in his mouth. Men get raped on campuses too; he isn’t out to stop only women from carrying concealed weapons, but everyone! And it’s not to leave people unprotected from rape, but to make the campus as a whole safer.
    Personally, I don’t support students carrying weapons on campus. You could have students using arms to commit rape, or even robbery. There’s no guarantee that a potential rapist won’t disarm you and shoot you, turning what would have been rape into murder. And alcohol/drugs and guns shouldn’t mix.
    If you’re a woman and want to carry a gun off campus for protection, go for it! I’ve never, ever heard anyone say it’s “unladylike” to do so. But a college campus is a completely different environment. That being said, women shouldn’t have to rely on passive resistance – learn self defense, carry pepper spray, etc. You can still protect yourself without a gun.

    Reply
    • Ceecee
      Feb 27, 2013 - 11:11 PM

      Well said Rory.

      Reply
  2. Jack Penland
    Feb 23, 2013 - 02:58 PM

    This is one that has caused me to actually play “Devil’s Advocate.” While I generally support concealed carry on campus, I am also aware of the amount of partying that goes on, (mostly because I participated in my fair share of it, lo these many years agone). The fact that I carry concealed all the time now is the main reason I no longer use alchohol. I suppose that reliance on the reasonableness and good sense of the gun owner might be tried. There is no way to insure the competence of every person who carries legally, any more than there is any way to guarantee the safety of an unarmed woman who may be attacked by someone who is armed. The notion that your weapons may be used against you has been proven wrong too many times to count, and I suspect “safe zones” are proving to be as effective as the “gun free zones” where all but one of the mass shootings in the past 20 years have occurred. When you carry a firearm, you carry life and death. You have the responsibility to be sure you are defending yourself or someone else against deadly force or serious injury before you deploy your weapon, and you have the responsibility to make sure you can hit what you are shooting at. I think it was David Crockett who said something like “Be sure you are right, then go ahead.” (Paraphrase). Armed and dangerous criminals will be on campus. Think it through when you carry. It’s a huge responsibility, because you cannot take back a bullet.

    Reply
  3. Ceecee
    Feb 22, 2013 - 11:28 PM

    There is always the potential that your attacker could overpower you before you have the chance to reach for your handgun, pepper spray or Taser. Worse, your attacker could turn your own weapon on you. Personally, I would much rather be proficient in marshal art self-defense. Disable you attacker and runaway.

    I don’t think that Joe Salazar was trying to be sexist. Rather, it seems to be an attempt to limit the number of guns on campus. Think about it; put yourself in the college administration’s position. There are thousands of students on campus, and no way of knowing who is carrying a concealed weapon at any one time. Your motive for carrying a concealed weapon is for protection. Not every shares the same motive as you. Someone else maybe carrying a concealed weapon to commit armed robbery, or to commit assault or even go on a shooting spree. Rather scary when you think about it. Even in the Wild West, weapons were surrender at the sheriff’s office or at the front door of a saloon.

    Reply
  4. Christopher Rushlau
    Feb 22, 2013 - 05:17 PM

    I would look for an answer in the idea of a bifurcated white woman bloc or echelon. It would be unladylike to shoot a rapist. I take a look at that sentence I just wrote and it seems an accurate presentation of a certain very privileged outlook. You’ve reported it here now. It’s what I’ve seen in my years. “Conspicuous consumption” comes to mind, from the only Carleton graduate who ever made a mark on the world, Thorstein Veblen. A ruling personality displays her power by feigning total weakness: gentility. Men stoop to do her bidding. She is simultaneously their mother and their lover. A queenocracy. What is her secret, the secret of her power? I can tell you one thing: incompetence is truly powerless. Someone who acts like they should be deferred to, or about whom other people act like this person should be deferred to, should be able to demonstrate that virtue: the word in Latin means “power” or “strength”. This privileged woman I am suggesting as the type or model of real power in the US’s racial/gender-distinguishing hierarchy (Jim Crow, Israel, and the Global War Against Hajis did not come about by accident) distinguishes herself by being incompetent. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
    Prediction: find a woman who abhors and is appalled by a women defending herself with a gun, press that woman for an explanation, and you will hear, when you hang in there and get an answer, with absolute nonsense. It is unladylike, perhaps.

    Reply
    • Christopher Rushlau
      Feb 22, 2013 - 05:19 PM

      I threw in an extra “with” in my next-to-last sentence. You will hear absolute nonsense. Such as, “It is unladylike”.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyrıght 2014 THE COLLEGE CONSERVATIVE.

Facebook

Twitter