OMG! I’m Shooting Guns! And Having a Good Time! OMG!

“I get it. I didn’t get it, but now I get it. Guns are really f**king fun.” That’s the conclusion of one of band of metrosexual hoplophobes who BuzzFeed rounded up to don tuxedos and (*gasp*) shoot guns. It will come as no surprise at all to most of you here that a good time was had by all. Rare is the individual — urban hipsters included — who can fire a heater for the first time and not come away from the experience with an ear-to-ear grin plastered on his or her face. In the after-action summations, you can almost hear the mental gears grinding as they try to reconcile their long- and firmly-held beliefs with the fact that they just had a hell of a good time. Baby steps. Baby steps.   [h/t Sean N.]

comments

  1. avatar FoRealz? says:

    Well points for trying. Looks like one possible convert.

  2. avatar preston says:

    Facts trump beliefs, see Sam Harris.

  3. avatar 5Spot says:

    That clip hurts my brain.

    1. avatar Bungameng says:

      I think you summed it up nicely.

  4. avatar Ralph says:

    Very nice — but they’ll still vote hard left and they’ll never respect 2A. Because only police, the military and gun ranges should have guns, or something. And hipsters’ fun will always trump our rights.

  5. avatar Phil says:

    One guy said he was less pro gun after shooting tho? They definitely were a mixed bag.

    1. avatar doesky2 says:

      He knows what his employers want to hear.

      1. avatar Tommycat says:

        Yeah, meanwhile he’ll be buying guns to take to the range until he gets a pro-gun job.

      2. avatar Scrubula says:

        Yeah i saw that video on the TTAG facebook page earlier and it sounded exactly like buzzfeed pandering.

  6. avatar juliesa says:

    It’s a step in the right direction, but jeez, I taught a teenage gay male relative to shoot, and he’s a lot more “manly” about shooting then those guys are. So am I. So are ALL my girlfriends. But then this is Texas.

    I only mention that because a couple of those guys were obsessed with masculinity and guns.

    1. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

      You, a bona fide woman, noticed this as well?

      Thanks for confirming my analysis. I’ve worked with much more manly, confident and less preening gay men in California. I don’t think there’s a Texas bias to your analysis.

    2. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

      There seems to be a general “sissiness” that is becoming more prevalent today…

      My wife and I often talk about it, due to the many experiences of being around her hipster/trendy college friends. She is more manly than most of the dudes, and she is a girly girl.

      1. avatar DGM says:

        You’ve noticed. Guys are becoming more ‘girly’ and Gals are becoming less ‘girly’.
        Check this out, don’t mind any religious or political rhetoric in the article, you don’t have to buy into it.

        http://thoughtsfromfrankandfern.blogspot.com/2015/01/the-androgynous-generation.html

        Note, the kinds of people you are referring to are ‘the androgynous generation’.

        1. avatar Grindstone says:

          Thanks for the link! It was a hilarious pile of garbage.

        2. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

          I was speaking more to the men being less like men, not women being more manly.

        3. avatar Summer says:

          A large part of gender is socially constructed. I’m not saying there aren’t “trends” in both genders but society also puts an EXTREME amount of pressure on girls and women to be nuturing, self-sacrificing, and want babies while simultaneously putting an extreme amount of pressure on boys and men to “never cry” and “rub some dirt on it”.

          So this whole women are supposed to be abc and men are supposed to be xyz nonsense is largely self-fulfilling prophecy. Talk to enough women as actual people long enough and give them a safe space to be honest and you’ll learn most of us are not nearly naturally as nurturing as you’ve been told we are or are supposed to be. And men have feelings. News at eleven.

    3. avatar Peaches says:

      I agree, I took a couple of my girlfriends out shooting, and wow, one of them had a grin on her face so big I almost couldn’t wipe it off. It’s actually funny, she started giving me a run for my money on accuracy

      1. avatar Summer says:

        Why is that funny?

  7. avatar Taylor TX says:

    “Military Grade Weapons”

    /epicfacepalm

    And the dude at the end who brings up having kids and them not being responsible gun owners, I would say maybeeeee, just possibly, it might be your parenting skills. I dont know how many more facepalms I can take today.

    1. avatar Tex300BLK says:

      Yeah I was screaming at the screen when he said that… no shit sherlock, children arent born knowing how to do lots of things that could end up hurting them if they do it wrong. You teach them how to eat, get dressed, ride bikes, you watch them when they play with legos for the first time to make sure they don’t stick the pieces in their mouths, but apparently in this guy’s mind you just hand em baby’s first glock and a box of FMJ’s and tell them to have a good time… I hope he was joking about having kids one day.

    2. avatar JasonM says:

      Are you trying to say that a full auto Tavor or full auto AKM aren’t military grade weapons?
      Or are you pointing out that there shouldn’t be any distinction between what soldiers get issued and what we can buy?

      1. avatar Taylor TX says:

        I just re-watched to double check, and I still dont see anything in the video with a giggle switch on it, but if I missed something, I definitely want to know.

        I referenced “Military Grade Weapons” as it seems to be some kind of anti buzzword similar to “Assault Weapons” and the myriad of other terms they seem to come up with. It occurred to me that it was probably due to some anti propaganda he had seen and then began repeating the term to further his stance on gun ownership.

        “Or are you pointing out that there shouldn’t be any distinction between what soldiers get issued and what we can buy?”

        I was not actually pointing this out while typing that earlier but hell yes that as well! Great point.

      2. avatar Nigil says:

        I think the point is more that a full-auto light machine gun is just as ‘military grade’ as 9mm handgun. Making it a worthless term for actually describing something.

    3. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

      Kids aren’t responsible any things until they’re taught to be… Watch a group of toddlers interacting with one other, there is merit of bad behavior- assault, battery, stealing, violence, selfishness, it’s utter havoc.

      Kids are selfish, little heathens, until taught otherwise. It’s called parenting.

    4. avatar Geoff PR says:

      ““Military Grade Weapons”

      /epicfacepalm”

      Almost as bad as ‘Mil.Spec.’

      I had someone use the ‘Mil Spec’ BS on me while trying to sell me an amp.

      He looked aghast when I told him ‘Mil Spec’ meant next to zero.

      Every. Single. Last. Thing. Bought by the US military has a ‘Mil Spec’.

      Including a bucket and a mop. A pencil.

      I then asked him if that amp’s semiconductors were radiation hardened against EMP and solar coronal mass ejections.

      Did every single component have documentation leading back to the manufacturer?

      Did it spend time in a vacuum chamber doing a test known as a ‘Shake and Bake’ where they re-create the shock and vibration it will experience during a launch to orbit?

      I asked him what precise ‘Mil Spec’ that amp had.

      The one for the mop? The pencil? Or the one for a reconnaissance satellite in a polar orbit?

      For some reason he lost interest in the sale.

    5. avatar Roymond says:

      I was floored by that guy. I would have said to his face that if he doesn’t think he’d be a good enough dad to teach his kids to be safe with guns, he shouldn’t become a dad — seriously.

  8. avatar 357M28 says:

    I give them respect for trying. I also give them +1 for the tuxedo @ gun range.

  9. avatar Komrad says:

    check out the Vice doc on Sandy Shoot
    similar premise, except with more journalistic integrity
    and the journalist comes away with an even bigger grin

    1. avatar Taylor TX says:

      I would too if I got to shoot a Chicago Typewriter and mp40 🙂

    2. avatar Ethan762 says:

      Even if it was a raving pro-2A piece Im not sure I could watch it.
      In my book VICE is lower than dog sh#^ in terms of journalistic integrity. I’ve tried to watch their “documentaries” on half a dozen subjects and always end up gagging on the pure, unadulterated bull before I’m 10min into it.

  10. avatar BDub says:

    I would have like to have seen some basic firearms instruction. I almost flipped out when that guy disengaged the safety with his finger on the trigger!

    God, I hate buzzfeed.

  11. avatar B Bradley says:

    Thats really all it takes to change a lot of (for the most part) people with pre-conceived notions about firearms. So far everyone that I’ve taken shooting has either become gun owner’s themselves or at the very least with a changed opinion on firearms as a whole.

  12. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

    Sigh. Facepalm. Double facepalm.

    If I had a friend here in the shop now, I’d go for triple and quadruple facepalm, borrowing palms to do it.

    The gun issues in this video are secondary.

    I could go on a rant here about the sorry state of manhood in America today, but I won’t. This video makes me want to rear up on my hind legs and start roaring at … whomever is responsible for these parental outcomes.

    Presumably, starting with the subjects’ single mothers.

    After I would expend my energy on that topic, then I might calm down enough to start talking about guns. The guns are merely props in a short film tragedy here.

    1. avatar Tom in Georgia says:

      That was my sentiment as well. On top of the negligent discharges (I think I saw at least three rounds fired into the ceiling) and the general carelessness all around (I would RUN AWAY LIKE HELL from this gaggle bunch) the whole thing is just a sad and depressing commentary on the decline of parenting in this country over the last half century or so.

      And believe me, I sincerely TRY to be nice to other folks regardless of their appearance, ethnicity and/or persuasion, but I’m not gonna lie. It’s hard.

      Tom

  13. avatar Taylor says:

    “In terms of actually feeling more manly for shooting a gun…I don’t think I’m more of a man”

    Lol you got that right guy.

    I wonder if we will start to see a huge population decline? I mean are women really sleeping with these man-boys?

    One guy said he grew up shooting guns but suddenly becomes less pro gun after this range visit? He insists an accident is bound to happen with children in the house?

    I think I need a drink. The state of men in this country is not looking good.

    1. avatar John M. says:

      “I mean are women really sleeping with these man-boys?”

      Yes. Yes they are. And if women sat up and noticed that men were on a marriage strike, they might begin to ask themselves why men are not interested in marrying them. But then the feminist “have it all” narrative might be called into question, so instead they just blame the men.

      1. avatar Summer says:

        To be fair there are plenty of women who are not interested in getting married either. If women could move past the social conditioning that they “need” to get married, many would not. Most of the reasons women married in the past are not a factor anymore. Women don’t HAVE to marry to not starve to death, nor are they arranged into marriages they don’t want passed along by fathers treating them like property. (Seriously, wasn’t that long ago.)

        I’m married and love my husband, but I got married in my early twenties. If I were single right now, I would not even be looking for anyone to marry and would remain single. It won’t be because I “can’t get anyone” no matter how much people like to parrot that narrative. This idea that all men don’t want to marry these terrible feminist women anymore while all the women are still desperate to land a husband is just flat out false. SOME men do not want to marry. Some do. Some women don’t want to marry. Some do.

        There are people with a WIDE range of social values so those who do want to marry I’m sure can find someone to marry who shares those values unless the problem is THEM.

        1. avatar Grindstone says:

          You are posting all sorts of wisdom today.

          If you were posting on my local gun forum, you’d be run out as an “evil lib dem”.

          It’s funny how narrow the idea of “self-determination” is for social cons.

        2. avatar Summer says:

          LOL I just found it really funny that he said these horrible feminists who can’t find a husband are “blaming the men” but there are plenty of women out there with conservative values who are quite old-fashioned in fact, that there really is no reason for any guy to be upset about what any of the liberal feminists do. Who CARES what they do? There are plenty of women who don’t do those things, so it reads as someone kvetching about how these mouthy women are blaming men for their own inabilities to secure a long-term mate, when um… isn’t that happening in the reverse? Why whine about the liberal feminists and how it’s “their loss”? Who cares? Find someone compatible with you and stop blaming the “feminist women”. Women are not some homogenous blob. If it’s not fair to lump all men in with the rapist misogynist hater assholes, it’s not okay to lump all women in with “these liberal feminists who can’t find men to marry them”.

          I will say I am a feminist in that I want to be treated like an equal human being. No special rules because I’m a girl and no treating me like some child because I don’t have man parts. But I don’t identify at all with liberal feminism or their values. I think they’ve completely lost the plot since they seem obsessed with free contraception and abortion rather than actually empowering women. And most of them are anti-gun and can’t seem to grasp why it might be a good idea to arm women for their own protection.

        3. avatar John M. says:

          Summer,

          There is a WHOLE lot more kvetching in my circles (conservative and Christian though they are) about Peter-Pan-man-boys-who-won’t-man-up-and-get-married than there is about feminist women not making attractive marriage partners.

          The fact of the matter is that modern American family law is so anti-man as to be almost ludicrous. Women can and often do (2/3s of divorces are filed by women) blow up families and are regularly rewarded with 13/14ths of child custody, 50% of the family’s wealth and a huge percentage of the man’s future earnings.

          This can’t go on for generations and have men not notice. The marriage strike has already begun (though not in the John M household), and our society will reap a whirlwind.

          The evidence is plain for those who would see it. Take a look.

        4. avatar Grindstone says:

          John M. a question: If couples are establishing long-lasting, fairly stable relationships but without paying the government a fee and asking for blessings from society, then what’s the difference? Marriage used to be the transfer of ownership of a woman from her father to her husband. Or a way to form a link between families for mutual prosperity. Or to ensure proper inheritance of custodianship of familial property. Marriage as a PARTNERSHIP is actually a very, very young idea, only a couple hundred (if that) years old. People are still having relationships, babies are still being born, and the world is still turning, much as it has for millions of years for humans. Even the ancient Greeks lamented about the “destructive” ways of the younger generations. Yet life has moved on regardless.
          Bottom line is, people are having meaningful, long-term, stable relationships without needing to have society tell them it “decorous”. That is liberty.

        5. avatar Summer says:

          John,

          Please, for the sake of all women in the 21st century, never marry. You seem to believe that marriage is some kind of slave contract wherein women must be your reproductive, domestic, and sexual servants without any complaint and how DARE she ever decide not to put up with your shit anymore, leave, and expect equal division of assets you both own?

          The “marriage strike” is all in your mind. Since just as many women these days as men do not want to get married. No women are sitting around in actual reality sobbing that men like you are not wanting to marry them.

          Please do us all a favor and do not marry or reproduce. If all the MRA assholes would truly be “men going their own way” and actually DO that, then the toxic anti-woman bullshit in the world would be an evolutionary dead end and we could all move on into a world where women are treated like people instead of convenience objects to feed and burp manbabies like yourself.

        6. avatar Summer says:

          @Grindstone Preach! 🙂

          What you are witnessing is the male tears of a man whose privilege and “right” to a reproductive, domestic, and sexual servant is being questioned by women who have decided they are no longer having any of it.

          And bless his heart, being an asshole might cost him some money in the division of assets portion of the program.

          Whaaa.

        7. avatar John M. says:

          @Grindstone: ‘If couples are establishing long-lasting, fairly stable relationships but without paying the government a fee and asking for blessings from society, then what’s the difference?’

          If a Lorcin were just as good as a Wilson Combat, then what’s the difference? The fact is that non-marriage relationships are less stable than marriages, even with the sorry state of marriages in our society. And children who grow up with both of their biological parents in the home outperform children from single-parent homes across many, many metrics, even when controlled for things like race and family income. I’m sorry to have to report this all to you, but it just is.

          ‘Even the ancient Greeks lamented about the “destructive” ways of the younger generations. Yet life has moved on regardless.’

          You may have noticed that somewhere between Socrates and today that Greece managed to stop being an intellectual jewel of the earth and started being just another bankrupt 3rd world country. Perhaps sometimes there is something to the idea that the youth aren’t the men or women their fathers and mothers were.

          Look, if you’d like to take a tour of an area where the family has been good and thoroughly destroyed, there’s probably a good case study in an inner city not far from you. You can go visit and report back on the state of liberty in those communities. I recommend visiting during daylight hours. And lock the doors in your car.

          @Summer: Your ad hominem attacks are so far from the mark that they aren’t even really offensive to me. You might want to re-read your comments and reflect on what they say about your character, though.

          ‘The “marriage strike” is all in your mind.’

          Really? Because average age at first marriage has been rising rather dramatically since the mid-90s. This is a fact. Why that’s happening is open to interpretation, but men can’t not notice that marriage gives them huge exposure to risks. Do you believe that people generally respond to incentives, both positive and negative?

          ‘Since just as many women these days as men do not want to get married. No women are sitting around in actual reality sobbing that men like you are not wanting to marry them.’

          Anecdotes aren’t evidence, but I know a number of women who greatly lament their lack of marriage opportunities. More so than men, not least because men’s biological clock works very differently than that of women. I doubt my own personal unavailability causes many tears, but of tears there are plenty, particularly in the 30+ set.

          Our society’s experiment in blowing up the traditional family isn’t going well so far. Again, outcomes for single-parent children tell the story here. I can see how reasonable people like you both can be in denial about this. But if we continue on our current track, it seems unlikely to me that your grandchildren will be able to deny it.

        8. avatar Summer says:

          John,

          You’re right, I re-read. Turns out you are already married. I’d say that’s a sad state of affairs but your latest post produces nuance.

          You may not be aware of this, but everything you said in your first post is talking points on MRA websites (men’s rights activists). These are the deluded fools who seem to think that men are being “oppressed” somehow by women. Holy crap. Seriously, be a woman for ONE week and then come tell me about how freaking oppressed you are.

          When you have to worry about letting some random stranger on a subway down easy so he doesn’t get violent with you for not giving him a chance because he’s a “nice guy really” then we’ll talk about how put upon men are in the world.

          Splitting MUTUALLY OWNED assets is not oppression. Yes, mixing your money in a legal entanglement with another human being is a risk. And I don’t blame men for not wanting to take that risk. I also do not blame women for not taking the risk either. (Saying marriage is a risk-free proposition for women is just stupid and painfully myopic. Women often put their lives and careers on hold to have babies. Then if the marriage doesn’t work out they usually end up never having any kind of financial security whatsoever. Acting like women are just flighty sluts is a lie. I’m sure some are, but plenty are leaving ABUSIVE or philandering husbands. So you think women should just stay with men who are cheating or beating them? “for the children”? Really? And if she does find the courage to leave… then she is NOT entitled to half the marital assets? Oh the poor poor menz!)

          When I say the “marriage strike is all in your mind” what I mean is… your apparent assumption that the marriage strike is: MEN sitting around going on “strike” and refusing to marry these horrible feminist shrews while the women are all begging on their knees for these assholes to marry them is untrue.

          Just. Not. Happening.

          Yeah, there are a few women out there who get a case of baby rabies and then scramble to try to find a man to settle down with, but this is by no means the majority of women. Childfree by choice women are a growing demographic, and before you spout on about how women “change their minds”, there are several OLD women in my family who never had children (by choice) and have never regretted that decision, and in a few decades I’ll be one of them.

          Guys who want to get married to old-fashioned traditional women can find PLENTY of those women in churches. Where you don’t find those women is in bars. The reality is that men who want to whore around and sleep with everything that moves then want a “traditional woman”, will not find such women because even traditional women refuse to put up with the crap women were forced to put up with for centuries for basic survival.

          i.e. nice virginal women who want to settle down and be wives, mothers, and domestic workers don’t want manwhores. So if you want a nice traditional woman you find her in a nice conservative church.

          So I call bullshit on the dudes who are like “I just want a nice girl and there aren’t any. So I’m not getting married because all women are worthless whores”. Untrue. There are plenty of “good girls” out there, but these guys aren’t worthy of them because their own lifestyles are not nearly as virtuous as what they want in a woman.

          In a more gender-equal world, women don’t have to put up with that crap and don’t have to take men like this at all.

          But assuming a ton of guys are “sitting this one out”? who cares? There are a lot of women “sitting this one out” as well. Plenty of women in my age group (thirties) are not married and have no intention of ever marrying. And if I hadn’t married (a great egalitarian guy btw), in my early twenties, I would probably be beating the anti-marriage drum with them.

          So great, we both have anecdata. Which shores up my point that not everybody is exactly the same and men who are whining about how terrible women are now are just whining because their privileged social guarantee of a woman to get sex from on tap, make male heirs, and cook and clean for them no longer is a guarantee. Boo hoo.

          You guys think women are shit now? Well, newsflash, many women today think the same thing about guys.

          But you act as if the “marriage strike” is some one-way deal and “the womminz will be sorry!” Sure they will. /sarcasm.

          The women won’t have to wash your stupid underwear and raise your babies and take the mommy track at work and short circuit their entire career. They might actually be able to achieve some level of financial independence without the weight of a husband and kids dragging them down. Seriously, it’s not all about the dudes.

          I have no biological clock. The biological clock is a myth for people who can’t find anything truly useful to do with their own lives and want to pass it forward to the next generation.

          Keep believing all the women are crying about not being able to be some man’s domestic servant.

          I have no children. So I won’t have grandchildren. Frankly, the world can go to hell and all I have to worry about is ME getting through it, not the horrible fate of future generations.

          I do agree with you on one thing, the world sure is getting shitty, but traditional marriage faltering, IMO, isn’t the reason. Maybe if marriage wasn’t such a shitty deal for women it would be thriving as an institution. But given that women flee it en masse at the first opportunity and right to, I’m guessing it’s never been much more than a property transaction. (seriously… why should women have to put out on demand, do almost all the childrearing work and all the domestic work and STILL work full time jobs? Exactly what about this arrangement would be appealing to any woman with ANY other choices in life?)

          If men think marriage is an equally shitty deal, then perhaps Grindstone is right and people need to find other ways to form pair bonds, because this shit is not working.

          Though I do agree people need to stop having babies they can’t properly raise. But I’m not going to pontificate about how every home needs a mommy and a daddy. Though every kid needs more than one adult trying to raise it. It used to be a village that did it.

        9. avatar John M. says:

          @Summer: Thank you for your change in tone. I do appreciate it. For my part, I reread your original post and your point about many women not wanting to marry is a true one. I think that women are generally more likely to change their minds on this later, and less likely to be able to do so as they age. I cannot prove this. I could easily prove that our culture kvetches more about unmarriageable men than it does about unmarriageable women if I cared to, and the men’s rights activists are correct when they point this out.

          (For the record, I’m not a men’s rights activist. Don’t tell anyone, but I actually don’t believe in rights, just duties. I also don’t generally condone activism, though I am an NRA and GOA member.)

          I have no issues from a political standpoint with at-fault divorce. In an at-fault divorce, a judge finds one party at fault due to adultery, abuse, addiction, abandonment, failure to support, etc. and awards assets, alimony and custody appropriately. (I’m also ok with bilateral divorces if couples want to work these things out themselves and present a divorce agreement to the judge. No need for staged adultery or what-have-you.) Suffice it to say, we have a no-fault divorce system where either party can blow up the marriage for any reason or no reason. The evidence is indisputable that this system has put men at a tremendous disadvantage and IMHO there will be a whirlwind to reap from this.

          I also think women as a group are less happy about the new arrangement than they were with the old one. And hey, come to think of it, it’s also a fact that women have become less happy over the last several decades.

        10. avatar Summer says:

          John,

          Yeah, sorry, I heard stuff in your first post that sounded like MRA “we menz are so oppressed by these evil women who are obviously ruling the world in a matriarchy” nonsense, and I reacted badly. In your reply it seemed clear that while you might hold some views that could be mixed up with MRA crap, there is no proof you are an actual MRA or generalized woman-hater.

          Re: women changing their minds later. I think a lot of that is social pressure. Some women do change their minds but many don’t. And what I’ve observed is women changing their minds in the other direction far more often like the “If I had it to do again, I never would have married” contingent. One reason a lot of widowers remarry but a lot of widows do not is… a LOT of these women will tell you point blank: “I don’t want to have to wait on another man. I want to be free.”

          The level of domestic servitude STILL expected from women in all but the most egalitarian marriages is pretty shocking. Especially when we have our own full time jobs for the most part now. One of MANY reasons I chose not to have children was that I knew even with marrying a great guy, that I would be doing ALL the childrearing. No thank you. I’m not going to spend all my time slaving away with no time for myself at all.

          Also, re: women past a certain age getting married… I think you’ll find if you dig a little deeper that there is a “window” where this is true. Women between 35 and 40 tend to have a difficult go of it. A lot of this is because of women who WANT BABIES and are in a big rush. So they come off desperate and insane and who wants to form a pair bond with that?

          Also, men who want to have kids, might get to marry a bit later, but they want younger women to procreate with. Which is fine. Women who make it over that no man’s land, hump, tend to find that relationship options start opening up again. I know a LOT of women who got married again in their 40’s or 50’s or even 60’s with no trouble. Because… men age too. And no matter how much you may WANT a 20 year old, unless you’ve got a lot of money, that’s probably really not on the menu for you past a certain age. I mean you can throw money at them in a strip club, but good luck marrying that young unless you are RICH.

          It might be difficult for older women to get married for the first time past a certain age, but since women can easily get married for the second time past a certain age, my guess is that never-marrieds in the “older” category are set in their ways and independence and just flat out won’t put up with anything from men.

          It’s why I can tell you if I were ever single again I would NEVER remarry. I don’t want to. Love my husband but as egalitarian as he is… if I didn’t LOVE him, I would not be married. It’s not an institution I would want any part of beyond the current iteration of it I’m living.

          Re: whining about unmarriageable men, I think that’s a social backlash going back to a time not that far back when women really had NO options to survive financially short of marriage or joining a convent. Society has really pushed women into marriage for a long time, and many of those situations were not favorable or safe for the women involved.

          In a way I agree with you re: rights. I mean you can talk about your rights all day long but someone with the will and power to override them won’t stop simply because you invoke your rights.

          re: no fault divorce, I don’t think anybody should have to stay married to someone against their will. Even if you just decided your partner’s love of green shirts is too much to take. Like it can be any stupid reason in the world. No one should be compelled to live with and sleep with someone they don’t want to be with. (I mean think this through… women doesn’t love or want to be with a guy but as long as she’s married to him and living with him he’s going to expect sex from her and probably certain domestic duties. Are you REALLY saying she should stay with this guy and have sex with someone basically against her will not to rock the societal boat? And if she won’t put out, he’ll cheat or file divorce on his own. There is just no morally legit reason to compel a woman to remain in a sexual relationship with a man she does not wish to be in. Full stop. Anything else sets her up for abusive and coercive sexual situations with someone she doesn’t want to touch her.)

          But the financial issues, I don’t know what the answer is to that. There are plenty of scenarios where a woman has produced children with the man and she will be in poverty without any financial support. And mutual assets are MUTUAL assets. If both names are on the mortgage, sorry but that house is half hers.

          I think people should be more careful about who they mingle their financial assets with. Both men and women. Men are seeing what a world where women are not FORCED to remain with them no matter what behavior transpires is like. They should plan accordingly. If that means men opt out of marriage, that is certainly their right. I think both genders should opt out since I don’t see a lot of real benefits in this arrangement (though from a childfree perspective I’m ignoring the children part. I think children make everything complicated. part of why I dont’ have them. So what people “want” may or may not give them a legitimate reason to be blowing up their marriage as you say. But I also think there are a lot of marriages where women are being mistreated that they shouldn’t have to remain unsafe just so the divorce rate goes down.)

          re: women as a group. Yes, women as a group are not that happy with their vaginas being up for rent to any random tosser in the world pressuring her to give it up on the first date and then being slut shamed for that and then not finding any decent men who are more than manbabies playing video games all day. Though honestly, I think if they’d develop the self esteem to not need a man to complete them and get off the “OMG I NEED BABIES” life track, they might find they can be plenty happy without these tired arrangements.

          Re: women “have become less happy over the last several decades”… hmmmmmm well… not to throw rocks here but you and another poster were the ones going on about the marriage strike and how you men just weren’t going to take it anymore. So it seems men are equally unhappy, otherwise you wouldn’t be bitching about it.

          I think the “battle between the sexes” has always been a problem, but when you silence half the population and make it so if they complain too much they will be out on the street shamed and in poverty, it might look on the surface as if everybody is happier. Whether they truly are or not, though, is questionable.

          “Mother’s little helper” wasn’t a thing in the fifties for nothing. The happy domestic slave and mother is not quite as real as you might like to believe. It’s a cultural myth, proven false by all the alcohol and drugs these women were taking just to cope with the drudgery and boredom of their lives while men got to go out and have real accomplishments and financial independence.

          No thank you. NO sexual relationship with ANY man is worth any of that nonsense ever. If I were single, I would just make my own orgasms and save myself a lot of drama in the future.

          And I know this post is already super long already but… you do seem to point out women’s unhappiness a lot. I think you should maybe check in with yourself and have a little think about why you feel so paternalistic toward women in general. Why is it your responsibility to protect us from ourselves? If women are unhappy in life it is their responsibility to figure out how to fix that… same with men.

        11. avatar Summer says:

          John,

          Bear with me, this is long. (Not quite a convo you can have with quippy one liners.)

          Yeah, sorry, I heard stuff in your first post that sounded like MRA “we menz are so oppressed by these evil women who are obviously ruling the world in a matriarchy” nonsense, and I reacted badly. In your reply it seemed clear that while you might hold some views that could be mixed up with MRA crap, there is no proof you are an actual MRA or generalized woman-hater.

          Re: women changing their minds later. I think a lot of that is social pressure. Some women do change their minds but many don’t. And what I’ve observed is women changing their minds in the other direction far more often like the “If I had it to do again, I never would have married” contingent. One reason a lot of widowers remarry but a lot of widows do not is… a LOT of these women will tell you point blank: “I don’t want to have to wait on another man. I want to be free.”

          The level of domestic servitude STILL expected from women in all but the most egalitarian marriages is pretty shocking. Especially when we have our own full time jobs for the most part now. One of MANY reasons I chose not to have children was that I knew even with marrying a great guy, that I would be doing ALL the childcare work. No thank you. I’m not going to spend all my time slaving away with no time for myself at all.

          Also, re: women past a certain age getting married… I think you’ll find if you dig a little deeper that there is a “window” where this is true. Women between 35 and 40 tend to have a difficult go of it. A lot of this is because of women who WANT BABIES and are in a big rush. So they come off desperate and insane and who wants to form a pair bond with that?

          Also, men who want to have kids, might get to marry a bit later, but they want younger women to procreate with. Which is fine. Women who make it over that no man’s land, hump, tend to find that relationship options start opening up again. I know a LOT of women who got married again in their 40’s or 50’s or even 60’s with no trouble. Because… men age too. And no matter how much you may WANT a 20 year old, unless you’ve got a lot of money, that’s probably really not on the menu for you past a certain age. I mean you can throw money at them in a strip club, but good luck marrying that young unless you are RICH.

          It might be difficult for older women to get married for the first time past a certain age, but since women can easily get married for the second time past a certain age, my guess is that never-marrieds in the “older” category are set in their ways and independence and just flat out won’t put up with anything from men. Which obviously makes it harder for them to marry.

          It’s why I can tell you if I were ever single again I would NEVER remarry. I don’t want to. Love my husband but as egalitarian as he is… if I didn’t LOVE him, I would not be married. It’s not an institution I would want any part of beyond the current iteration of it I’m living.

          Re: whining about unmarriageable men, I think that’s a social backlash going back to a time not that far back when women really had NO options to survive financially short of marriage or joining a convent. Society has really pushed women into marriage for a long time, and many of those situations were not favorable or safe for the women involved.

          In a way I agree with you re: rights. I mean you can talk about your rights all day long but someone with the will and power to override them won’t stop simply because you start talking about your rights.

          re: no fault divorce, I don’t think anybody should have to stay married to someone against their will. Even if you just decided your partner’s love of green shirts is too much to take. Like it can be any stupid reason in the world. No one should be compelled to live with and sleep with someone they don’t want to be with. (I mean think this through…a woman doesn’t love or want to be with a guy but as long as she’s married to him and living with him he’s going to expect sex from her and probably certain domestic duties. Are you REALLY saying she should stay with this guy and have sex with someone basically against her will not to rock the societal boat? And if she won’t put out, he’ll cheat or file divorce on his own. There is just no morally legit reason to compel a woman to remain in a sexual relationship with a man she does not wish to be in. Full stop. Marriage is a “sexual relationship”. How is it not rape-y to suggest women stay in a sexual relationship/marriage she doesn’t want? Anything else sets her up for abusive and coercive sexual situations with someone she doesn’t want to touch her.)

          But the financial issues, I don’t know what the answer is to that. There are plenty of scenarios where a woman has produced children with the man and she will be in poverty without any financial support. And mutual assets are MUTUAL assets. If both names are on the mortgage, sorry but that house is half hers.

          I think people should be more careful about who they mingle their financial assets with. Both men and women. Men are seeing what a world where women are not FORCED to remain with them no matter what behavior transpires is like. They should plan accordingly. If that means men opt out of marriage, that is certainly their right. I think both genders should opt out since I don’t see a lot of real benefits in this arrangement (though from a childfree perspective I’m ignoring the children part. I think children make everything complicated. part of why I dont’ have them. So what people “want” may or may not give them a legitimate reason to be blowing up their marriage as you say. But I also think there are a lot of marriages where women are being mistreated that they shouldn’t have to remain unsafe just so the divorce rate goes down. And also the nonconsensual sexual relationship thing is icky no matter whether the couple has children or not.)

          re: women as a group. Yes, women as a group are not that happy with their vaginas being up for rent to any random tosser in the world pressuring her to give it up on the first date and then being slut shamed for that and then not finding any decent men who are more than manbabies playing video games all day. Though honestly, I think if they’d develop the self esteem to not need a man to complete them and get off the “OMG I NEED BABIES” life track, they might find they can be plenty happy without these tired arrangements. (Or by being confident in who they are, they might stumble upon a great guy while they aren’t looking for one.)

          Re: women “have become less happy over the last several decades”… hmmmmmm well… not to throw rocks here but you and another poster were the ones going on about the marriage strike and how you men just weren’t going to take it anymore. It wasn’t like I or any other woman here just randomly said: “You know what sucks? MEN! They are so not marriageable!” So it seems men are equally unhappy, otherwise you wouldn’t be bitching about it.

          I think the “battle between the sexes” has always been a problem, but when you silence half the population and make it so if they complain too much they will be out on the street shamed and in poverty, it might look on the surface as if everybody is happier. Whether they truly are or not, though, is questionable.

          “Mother’s little helper” wasn’t a thing in the fifties for nothing. The happy domestic servant and mother is not quite as real as you might like to believe. It’s a cultural myth, proven false by all the alcohol and drugs these women were taking just to cope with the drudgery and boredom of their lives while men got to go out and have real accomplishments and financial independence.

          No thank you. NO sexual relationship with ANY man is worth any of that nonsense ever. If I were single, I wouldn’t sign up.

          And I know this post is already super long already but… you do seem to point out women’s unhappiness a lot. I think you should maybe check in with yourself and have a little think about why you feel so paternalistic toward women in general. Why is it your responsibility to protect us from ourselves? If women are unhappy in life it is their responsibility to figure out how to fix that… same with men.

    2. avatar T.G. says:

      If it makes you feel any better, some of us 20 something’s still think gun ownership is an important part of growing up and accepting responsibility for yourself. And we pass it onto our kids too.

      Seriously though, is this a big city/little city thing? I know my town was rural, but I graduated with guys every bit as “hipster” as these goofs, and even they knew their way around a shotgun.

      1. avatar Grindstone says:

        There’s plenty of Millennials who favor gun ownership. But they also have a healthy tolerance for people who are different. Which seems to be a bit lacking in this comment section.

  14. avatar TomCruise says:

    Reading through this thread, the opinions voiced and how they are worded it’s no wonder the crowd here is considered somewhat “kooky”.

    1. avatar doesky2 says:

      The metrosexual attitude oozing from these “guys” rightfully deserves our ridicule. This country was not made by 20-something year old phallus-equipped idiots that revel in their non-masculinity.

      1. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

        Indeed.

        Consider that men the same age as the ones depicted above were in command of things like bombers, transports, small ships in WWII, with the responsibility of life and death of the men under their command. Consider the average Private in the armed forces in WWII, Korea and Vietnam (or Desert Storm, etc, etc) and look at the above depicted men.

        Consider the men who built the rails, bridges, roads, built Detroit into the manufacturing powerhouse it became, etc. And look at the above depicted men.

        Upon viewing the video above, one’s mind can not help but revolt.

      2. avatar Grindstone says:

        Right! It was made by men wearing wigs, stockings, and lace-tripped jackets! Wait…

    2. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

      If I am thought to be “kooky” by the likes of people in this video, I’ll wear it like a badge of honor.

    3. avatar Azman says:

      I’m far from the typical masculine image. But if if society considers these people normal and the this far pretty logical arguments above me as “kooky” then society needs CPR. That’s effed up.

  15. avatar fishydude says:

    One sort of sane person and a 3 nearly brain dead libs. The stupid coming out of them in the beginning was par for the course for their ilk.
    But there is hope.
    Kind of like when an anti-cop activists did some realistic scenarios enactments with the police.

  16. avatar doesky2 says:

    you can almost hear the mental gears grinding as they try to reconcile their long- and firmly-held beliefs with the fact that they just had a hell of a good time

    The average Leftist has been pumped up with so many fallacies by their college professors and the MFM that it is indeed fascinating when they are confronted first-hand with the truth about their wrong-headed beliefs. Some refuse to accept it because it would mean that other long-standing beliefs of theirs just may be wrong. For most of them they just write it off as an anomaly and return to the hive. In some (very) rare cases it can lead to the curtain coming down.

  17. avatar Timmy! says:

    Well, there’s five minutes I’ll never get back.

  18. avatar Ing says:

    “Every time you pull the trigger, that’s another life you could be taking.”

    But you’re not taking lives. Think about that for a minute. Let it soak in. Now think about how many of the nation’s 310 million guns aren’t being used to harm anyone (and never will be).

    “It didn’t turn us into men, it turned us into boys. The men were the people at the gun range who really knew what they were doing.”

    That was the most perceptive comment in the whole video. Thing is, it doesn’t take a whole lot to “know what you’re doing.” Guns are actually pretty darn simple. Being responsible for the powerful tool you have at hand — knowing how it works, when to use it (or not), and keeping others safe through your personal actions — that’s what men do. It’s what women do, too.

    In a lot of ways, my 13-year-old daughter is more of an adult than these four guys. But maybe they’ll get there. I’m not holding out hope (they are in California working for Gawker, after all), but you never know.

    1. avatar Summer says:

      “In a lot of ways my 13-yr-old daughter is more of an adult…”

      I think this is the key idea. We keep talking about how “nonmanly” these guys are and how “repulsive” that is. But isn’t the actual problem that they are behaving like developmentally stunted children? It’s offensive to act as if that attitude is “okay in women” but not in men. It’s not okay in any grown adult human being. Their problem isn’t that they aren’t “manly”. Their problem is that they are behaving like children and expect someone else to take care of them and protect them from themselves.

      1. avatar Grindstone says:

        You nailed it perfectly. It’s easier to ridicule and mock people that are different to cover for our own insecurities than to actually think critically.

        1. avatar Summer says:

          Thanks, Grindstone!

      2. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

        That last sentence was profound and the moral foundation of gun ownership and self protection.

        Why is it some stranger’s “duty” or “job” to put his or her life at risk protecting you? Is their life worth so little, while your’s worth so much, I think not.

        Morally speaking, it is unreasonable to expect someone to protect you when you refuse to protect yourself, but I guess it no less happens.

        1. avatar Summer says:

          🙂

  19. avatar Toasty says:

    “Semi-automatic weapons are legal in the US”

    No fucking shit BuzzFeed!

    1. avatar Summer says:

      When people say things like this it’s really clear they are not familiar with firearms at all. I sometimes think they think “semi-automatic weapons” are some big scary thing that is rare. Or that they are conflating them with fully automatic. Or that they simply don’t know what any of these words mean. Just about every standard handgun on the market is semi-auto. It’s not some exotic classification for weapons. But I really think they think it is.

      Makes me think of the “Why would you shoot to kill? Why not just shoot the bad guy in the knee.” People who know absolutely nothing about guns should keep their mouths shut about them.

      1. avatar Grindstone says:

        Just read (if you dare) the comments in the YouTube page. The first one is a woman declaring her reasons for owning guns. In the inevitable argument, someone asks “why would you shoot someone breaking into your house?”

        I don’t think anything short of a heavy dose of reality would shake that world view.

        1. avatar Summer says:

          Yes, why would she… a woman… shoot some random stranger who may be breaking in just to steal her TV, or may be breaking in to rape and kill her.

          It’s so mystifying! Why indeed!

  20. avatar ChiGurh says:

    “I don’t have a negative opinion about guns; I do have negative opinions about people”

    If only all progressives thought like that…

  21. avatar Phil COV says:

    This just in: sex, nachos, sleeping late, footy-pajamas, ice cream, hugs, beer, presents and finding $20 in your jeans pocket also moved to the “could be good” list.

  22. avatar cmeat says:

    things haven’t changed that much. basic training would help these emo’s.
    bring back the draft. everybody serves.

    1. avatar Grindstone says:

      Nothing says “freedom for all” like coerced service to the state…

  23. avatar Ray Ficara says:

    ONE reason they are going after ranges and CRIMINALIZING the sort term loan of a gun is to KEEP this from happening.

    Ray

  24. avatar pod says:

    It was a covert anti-2A smear piece. I’m wondering also what is up with Los Angeles Gun Club, this is the second time they’ve let in a bunch of Buzzfeed cretins into the mix to mishandle firearms and otherwise present gun usage in a bad light. If I were an RSO, I would have tossed them out five seconds into the filming…

  25. avatar Davis Thompson says:

    I’ve taken my 12 year old shooting and he wasn’t even close to being as big a child as these jerks were.

  26. avatar DGM says:

    As a former Hipster, I have to say their objections are more of a pre-made, cookie cutter type mentality that they were fed and evidently ate. When I was in college, got out in 2011, I had a mullet, and wore prescription glasses that looked like they came from Buddy Holly’s estate sale. When I would hang out with a girl for the first time, we wouldn’t go and do stereotypical Hipster shit like going to the Ft. Worth Botanical Gardens or hitting up the food trucks off W. 7th street by Montgomery Plaza. Nope. We would go to the shooting range that’s by Winchester Gallery! Trumps going to a bookstore or coffee shop every time!

    1. avatar Grindstone says:

      Why not enjoy all of the above?

      1. avatar DGM says:

        Nothing, all of those things came after the first time visit for many a lady to the shooting range. The shooting range and first time shooting a gun experience was what paved the way for all those other things to take place though. Had I done those other things before hand then the trip to the shooting range never would have taken place. That is true for 3 out of 7 or 8 experiences that I can recall.

  27. avatar ghost says:

    I am sort of simplistic. I believe in the right to own firearms. I also believe in others right not to own firearms. I will not pressure them to own a firearm. Yet, somehow they feel it is ok to restrict my right to own one? How many of us had anything to do with the atrocities committed by people that would have ignored any law, any restrictions, any political motives, any humane considerations, and would have killed with whatever they had available. It somehow makes us all safer if we simply do not have the means or will to resist? I have a simple plan, like all plans, it is subject to variations. Be between the threat, and those you are protecting.

  28. avatar lee says:

    If this is what society produces today we are in trouble. That was without a doubt the most effeminate group of men ive ever seen. Just hearing that guy say masculinity made me cringe.

    Seriously…men are supposed to be masculine. Women, feminine. If we want gun rights when need to start by raising boys to be men.

    1. avatar Summer says:

      Screw feminine. Feminine means: I’m supposed to wear dresses, spend a stupid amount of time doing weird shit to my hair and slathering on makeup just to be “normal”. I’m supposed to have and raise babies. I’m supposed to sit around waiting for some big strong man to protect me. And I’m in charge of most of the cooking and domestic duties.

      NO.

      I will not wear dresses or makeup or do weird shit to my hair or have babies or do inordinate amounts of housework when I have my own job. And I am armed, so I really don’t need a guy to “protect me”. However I’m happy for my husband to have my back and I have his should some bad shit ever go down.

  29. avatar JSF001 says:

    I want to know how do they get away acting like that? They were acting so stereotypically gay that I am sure it is an act. I have never met a real life gay person that was anywhere close to being that stereotype. Shouldn’t the SJW’s be screaming for those guy’s bloody heads for perpetuating some discrimination or another.

  30. avatar DerryM says:

    These guys are what you get when you raise children on Sesame Street, Teletubbies, Smurfs and Mr. Rogers. Fortunately, some children recover.

  31. avatar IAB2 says:

    We have to remember this is buzzfeed, after all.

    A lot of the social media, if not most of it, is simply artificial. Its self-promoting, out there on the edge, self-referential, pretty much like a delayed adolescense self-centered twenties something trust fund kid like some of these man-boys. Think Gawker, Fakebook, Vox, and the progtard educational establishment jamming it down boys throats that all their natural impulses are bad. Sit down, be quiet, girls rule, boys are fools, anything you like is bad- playing cowboys and native americans, being hauled into principals office for drawing a doodle of a gun, fer chrissakes… remember your notebooks and text book margins all full of stick figures shooting guns with dot dot dot lines…

    And note, I am not jumping on these hipsters, in contempt, but noting in sympathy for their blindness, that they dont even know the caricatures they have become, in the political correct-ness they are trying, but not quite escaping, (that last bit about becoming less pro-gun – can only imagine how that was forced at the end…) in spite of their natural and normal enthusiasm for doing something that got their testicles going again.

    I agree with you Dys.
    And I agree with you too, Summer.
    The progtards are pigeon-holing everyone, and whats worse, damning those who disagree with the pc narrative. No wonder kids are confused these days, no matter what their natural instincts might be.

    1. avatar Summer says:

      Thanks! We could improve a lot of problems by teaching basic values and responsibility rather than trying to force everybody into pre-constructed social-collective boxes. I’ve got news but the reason we have issues in society is not because “women got uppity and cut their hair short” or because some guys have become less outwardly macho or like other dudes. You can be a shitty person even if you’re following all the supposed gender norms. It’s the wrong thing to obsess over IMO.

Write a Comment

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

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email