05.30.15

Psychology Today — on WhiteManistan

Posted in Culture of Lickspittle, WhiteManistan at 9:53 am by George Smith

From the LA Times this week, in passing:

I found that men — the vast majority of gun owners are men — may also carry weapons as a reaction to a broader socioeconomic decline.


Frankie, a retired Detroiter, told me that in the 70s he got “a job at General Motors, and they were hiring people off the street with zero education, and they could work for 20 years, and they could make a living. You can’t do that now.”

As men doubt their ability to provide, their desire to protect becomes all the more important. They see carrying a gun as a masculine duty and the gun itself as a vehicle for a hardened kind of care-work — catering for others by shielding them from danger, with the threat of lethal force.


The gun rights platform is not just about guns. It’s also about a crisis of confidence in the American dream. And this is why gun control efforts ignite such intense backlashes. Restrictions are received as a personal affront to men who find in guns a sense of duty, relevance and even dignity.

Not all men. The Lehigh Valley was much like Detroit and Flint. Many who’ve lived through the 40 year slump and great decline have not retreated into firearm possession as a means of retaining a personal dignity.

That’d be myself, for one.

4 Comments

  1. anon said,

    May 31, 2015 at 1:04 pm

    Like our generous host here, I am also someone who grew up in the Lehigh Valley. I don’t go back there very much, for a number of reasons, economic and social, mostly.

    My experiences there make me respectfully disagree about the level of hoplophilia or hoplomania going on in the Lehigh Valley. The first day of deer season, traditionally the Monday after the Thanksgiving weekend, was a holiday in my school district. (In PA, there are a number of flavors of “deer season,” depending on the weapon(s) used and the variety of deer being hunted.)

    The basic expectation was that a large percentage of the students, their fathers, and the teachers would be out in the woods, looking for a buck to kill, so there was no point in having classes.

  2. George Smith said,

    June 2, 2015 at 2:58 pm

    Yeah, I remember that. I also remember one restriction to not take your dog out the first day, I don’t recall the game being hunted. The reasoning, sensible, was that on the 1st day the hunters might be a little too enthusiastic. The restriction was to spare the accidental bagging of the faithful hunting dog through application of too much careless zeal..

  3. anon said,

    June 2, 2015 at 5:50 pm

    And I remember stories of people who had decorative ceramic deer statues in their front yard shattered by rifle fire…

    The house being less than, say, 100 feet away from said “deer” most of the time never seemed to be a reason NOT to pull the trigger.

  4. George Smith said,

    June 3, 2015 at 12:25 pm

    Could be a bit of an urban legend as I kind find only one page, outlining it from a newspaper joke story.

    However, I am not surprised that lawn deer are damaged.

    http://www.wickedlocal.com/article/20100310/News/303109077

    I also saw one story mentioned a buck had decided on combat with a lawn ornament.