“What’s seriously troubling about this new breed of armed women is they seem to take more pleasure than their men in destroying life, even as they are the givers of life.” – Bonnie Erbe, Gun marketers aim to get more women to hunt, timesherald.com
“What’s seriously troubling about this new breed of armed women is they seem to take more pleasure than their men in destroying life, even as they are the givers of life.” – Bonnie Erbe, Gun marketers aim to get more women to hunt, timesherald.com
The Hindus (although they don’t call themselves such) have a deity called Shiva. He embodies creation and destruction. Both are intimitately connected. To insinuate that this natural cycle is “wrong” is small-minded.
I am offended by the implied sexism that woman must remain defenseless victims. Unarmed and unable to protect themselves or provide for their physical welfare.
This article may as well have said that a woman is fit to only remain at home waiting to be victimized until a provider returns with food for her to prepare.
Click the link and read the entire article:
“It’s one thing if a woman feels scared living alone and wants a handgun for self-protection. She’s ignoring the data that show she is more likely to be harmed by that weapon than she is to be saved by it. Nonetheless, it makes her feel in greater control of her dangerous environment, so that is understandable.”
This is more a half truth and goes in to a completely different issue, the right to suicide.
As long as they have a good time, that’s all that counts.
From the article:
“Self-protection differs greatly in terms of emotional fulfillment from pointing a scoped, high-powered weapon at a helpless creature and taking pleasure in its death. The latter action is so devoid of empathy as to emulate an armed man firing into a crowd of unsuspecting, unarmed people nearby.”
All I can say is wow. I’ve always wondered how the the antis reconcile it being bad to hunt for sport (not food), yet natural for an animal to do the same. My dog loves to shake his toys, and if we didnt have leash laws around here, i’m sure he would be doing the same with squirrels, even if he wasnt hungry. He gets just a big of a smile on his face when is he shaking something as when he is humping something.
People with this kind of idiotic stance are people who, subconsciously, are prettified by the simple fact that humans are animals and abide by the same natural laws as animals.
I hunt because I like to fill my freezer with deer and pigs.
Not sure why they think that hunting is supposed to put the hunter in a primal situation. Anything making the job easier is somehow considered cheating.
So I guess when fishing…anything other than diving in and grabbing the fish with your bare hands is less than sporting?
I don’t get why this author thinks that hunting is wrong? Haven’t we hunted for thousands of years to survive? Don’t all other predators hunt too and enjoy it? I know my cat has fun playing baseball with mice and chipmunks. Why can’t we make finding our food fun too?
I highly dislike moral absolutism. Some people have such narrow perspectives. Sure, it’s morally wrong to kill in general, but there are thousands of exceptions to that rule.
Well, here’s what I tried to post on that site:
Obviously, you’ve never been deer hunting in Oregon. I can’t speak to the situation in PA. There is no “slaughter” of animals. Killing, maybe, if you’re lucky. Slaughter is something that happens at factory farms and industrial meat packing plants. I assume you’re a vegan (or a hypocrite), and avoid any industrial exploitation of animals, which is admirable. For me, and those that I hunt with, the killing of a deer is a very serious matter. We do it for the meat, and, yes, for the experience, but never callously or casually. We strive to be as humane as possible. And hunting is not easy. Usually, we don’t succeed. It’s not some sort of shooting gallery with a bunch of deer. It’s rugged mountain terrain with dense forest, days of walking in the cold and wet, etc.
I hope it’s true that hunting is gaining popularity among women. I plan to indoctrinate my daughter. Like nothing else, hunting gives one a relationship to the habitat where animals live, and an appreciation of wildlife in general. That burger at McDonald’s just fills you with salt and grease.
Please make the pictures link to the article and not just the image itself.
huh?
It’s actually a rather simple concept–often when I post images from my imageshack account I tag the thumbnail as visible while I tag the visible thumbnail as a direct link to the full-size image. That’s easy to do with BBCode (just nesting img tags inside URL tags), and HTML works in a similar manner.
“What’s seriously troubling about this new breed of armed women is they seem to take more pleasure than their men in destroying life, even as they are the givers of life.” – Bonnie Erbe,
Bonnie has been drinking too much of that feminist kool-aid.
Negative. Bonnie has been drinking the PETA koolaid.
Left this but only saw part of it posted,
“The studies that conclude owning a gun leaves you with a greater risk of getting shot with it is a load of malarkey and apparently you’re one of those people that feel lying down and getting raped/robbed/abused is better than brandishing and scaring off the perpetrator or simply shooting the piece of crap rapist/robber/abuser. If that’s your choice in life then fine, but I find it crass to judge other women who take exception to getting raped/robbed/abused.
As for hunting, it is hunters (women too!) paying for licenses and tags that fund the Fish and Game Services who manage healthy populations of all species of game animals. Too many folks have no idea that to keep animal populations healthy there needs to be predation whether it be from natural predators or humans. Tell me Mrs/Ms Erbe, throughout your years how much have you done to ensure healthy and happy populations of game animals? Do you enjoy seeing dogs or cats die from disease or starvation? That is exactly what happens to far too many deer in areas where hunting is banned. Anyone who knows the slightest about nature knows that there is a definite balance between population and health. Nature has dictated that fact for millions of years before humans came around. I’m sure you realize the starvation around the world? How much worse would it be if there were twice our current population? With humans and animals there is always a finite amount of food to be had and it can only support so many beings. Game animals don’t have the luxury of U.N. food drops so too many animals with too little sustenance means disease and starvation.
Its very easy to adopt a knee-jerk reaction towards hunting but it always has been and always will be a great way to keep game populations healthy and to put the finest meat to be had on American tables. Meat from game animals is as free-range as it gets and entirely free from growth hormones, antibiotics or any other chemicals. As other posters have mentioned, do you prefer the life of an animal that was lived in an industrial slaughter atmosphere? Is that somehow better? A good sized Moose will yield 600 lbs of meat. A good sized Elk with yield 400 lbs. of meat. A good sized Whitetail Deer will yield 100 lbs. of meat. Take stock of the amount store bought meat an average family eats in a year. Now compare it to what a man or WOMAN can harvest for their family while paying money to the folks who truly know and care about healthy game. A good hunter knows exactly where to shoot game to make the kill as quick and humane as possible. That is the hunters creed. All wild game have lived their lives in nature as they were intended and met their end quick and painless. Can you say the same for the beef, pork or fowl that you or your acquaintances buy in the store? “
I agree with everything you said execpt the distinction of “natural predators or humans” Humans are and always have been and always will be as natural as predators as a cougar, wolf or coyote. Humans have been hunting for a couple of million years. There is a strong suspicion that Asian immigrants to North American destroyed the populations of megafauna that once roamed freely in North America. So-called Native Americans had no more reverence for the natural world than 19th century Europeans. Humans are the only species that can regulate the population and maintain the health of the natural world.
Very well said.
That wasnt an article it was a rant.
I wasnt talking about mr. farago’s fine article, i meant the scary liberal hippie woman.
SO women, empowered with the right to choose death over unborn children, should not be killing animals as well? Liberals are interesting people to watch but you don’t want them running things.
What’s amusing is that unless Ms. Erbe is a vegan who shuns all animal products in clothing (shoes, belts, etc) then she is an animal-killer-by-proxy.
The fact that she may not “revel” in her carnivorosity does not make her morally superior to those of us who hunt. And assuming that she’s not a vegan, I somehow doubt that she fights back tears for the poor, poor cow as she chews on a juicy steak.
Seems like the biggest misogynists have always been women.
Daughter took a Hunter Safety course and won a competition shoot against the Men at one of the local gun clubs. She is great with a scoped rifle. I do not see a big deal with Women having guns.