OU letter

I will not support this dude because he is progun - Futo because:

1. I actually think he may have committed a sexually harassing act.

2. His argument was so tactically stupid as
to weaken support for us. (I would support the right to say stupid things if it was not hateful).

The tool argument could be made better and in a manner than is more convincing.

If his goal was to convince people using his argument, let me ask you:

Who was his target audience?
Did he change any minds?
Did he have the side effect of suggesting
that gun owners are rather ridiculous?

I work in the target audience, academics and
can ask - I can find no one outside of gun fora that think this was a convincing argument. At best, I get people who are not progun thinking he is an idiot. We have a strong progun group at work and we all think that he was not productive.

The sexual connotation of the argument weakens the logic that might be behind it.

So if he is such a brilliant tactician, where are the praises for his argument except here.

There have been other cases of proRKBA folks getting critiiczed at their school. They have won court cases based on academic freedom and the 1st Amend. They didn't result to childish vulgarity.

So since I work on the playing field, Futo, you don't know where the bases are in this game. :)

I convince people, this guy didn't help me.
 
Here is the text of the 2/26 story appearing in "The Daily Oklahoman"

PROFESSOR’S LETTER DRAWS IRE

Norman—An official with a student organization has filed a sexual harassment complaint against a University if Oklahoma professor who wrote a letter to a campus newspaper comparing a vagina to a handgun.

Advocates for Sexual Assault Awareness in Norman issued a news release Friday condemning David Deming’s comments and equated them sexual harassment.

The organization is affiliated with the United Ministry Center in Norman. Center Director Becky Herbert said she filed a sexual complaint against Deming with OU’s Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action office.

Deming, an associate professor of geology and geophysics, Friday said he doesn’t regret writing even though it outraged some women on campus.

"I suppose a lot of people were offended, but I was offended to begin with," Deming said.

Deming’s letter was published in Monday’s edition of The Oklahoma Daily. He was responding to an article published Feb. 18 in the newspaper and written by Yale Daily News columnist Joni Kletter.

Advocating stricter gun controls laws, Kletter wrote "easy access to a handgun allows everyone in this country, including criminal, youths and the mentally disabled, to quickly and easily kill as many random people as they want."

Deming, a gun owner and member of the National Riffle Association, said he was "very insulted" by the column. He responded by writing that "Kletter’s easy access to a vagina enables her to quickly and easily have sex with as many people as she wants."

He also wrote that Kletter’s "possession of an unregistered vagina also equips her to work as a prostitute and spread venereal diseases."

Deming said he was attempting to show that "my gun no more makes me a killer than her vagina makes her an immoral person."

Herbert said she is aware of at least six written complaints against Deming.

"Having my vagina equated with a handgun is degrading, and for this to go unaddressed by the university is demoralizing," she said.

OU arts and science senior Lauren Avery said," It was unnecessary for Deming to take an argument concerning gun control and turn it into an argument against women’s sexuality."

Herbert wants the university to reprimand Deming and require him to receive sensitivity training on women’s issues. She thinks Deming should be fired if he has made similar comments in the classroom.

Deming said his comments were political opinion and not sexual harassment. Those who have filed complaints have "no more respect for the First Amendment than they do the Second," he said.

"On the lighter side, I’m glad that somebody on campus is finally excited about something."
 
Glenn, OK, we can agree to disagree about whether this is, on balance, good or bad for the cause. I think the publicity and the points made make for more good than bad.

As far as whether this guy committed a sexually harassing act, we will also have to agree to disagree, because I think it is absolutely absurd that what he did could in any way shape or form be deemed to be sexual harassment, for many reasons, some of which are mentioned above. I don't buy for one second that someone who enters a public debate can claim that a response creates a hostile environment to live/work in, just because the response contained FACTS pertaining to reproductive organs. To say that he used "childish vulgarity" is utterly ridiculous. How is a scientific word like "vagina" vulgar I ask? What is childish about stating facts about the vagina? Should scientists who study reproductive systems of the human body stop using the word vagina and start using the words "her thingy"? Or should they just stop their silly vulgar field of research altogether? You are some kind of kneejerk prude who apparently feels scared and ashamed by the use of ANY term referring to anything remotely sexual; otherwise I can't see how you come up with "childish vulgarity". Notice the prof didn't use any of the veritable plethora of slang words to describe the body part.

Again, I think you make some good points about whether the argument is EFFECTIVE as against the fence-sitters. But to suggest the metaphor is not apt, but rather "vulgar" is flat wrong, IMO.

[This message has been edited by Futo Inu (edited March 03, 2000).]
 
Futo - we will agree to disagree on this one.

I just wish he could have made the argument in a better way. Sigh.

Maybe I'm becoming a prude in my old age but
I think he was vulgar. I've seen women harassed in the work place. I've been PC'ed out of a job myself. I've spoke up to defend the speech rights of the conservative and
argued against discrimination against gays.
Gee - I'm a hell of a guy. He offended me.

I make the RKBA arguments all the time based on the data and research. Said this before.
 
Here is my email to OU President David Boren (find his email addy posted above):

Subject: Alumnus support for Prof Deming

Dear Mr. Boren:

As a double graduate/alumnus of the U. of Oklahoma (Colleges of Business and Law), I want to express my strong support for Prof. Deming for his pro-freedom stance, and denounce the illogical conclusions of his critics. Please stand up for freedom of speech (you do not have to take a stance on firearms freedoms) by supporting Mr. Deming's right to speak publicly on this issue. Any allegation of sexual harassment by his comments regarding individual gun freedoms is outrageous and ludicrous. He has done absolutely nothing wrong, and should not suffer a single negative consequence for exercising his freedom of speech. Thank you very much.

Sincerely,

Daniel J. Stoner, Esq.
 
The guy didn't do anything wrong! Rude and crude, maybe?
Anytime someone(male) does,write a letter or looks,someone will be offended. If it isn't PC.
I will bet you that if the letter were written in support of gun control,using the same language, no one would bitch.

My mark: X (Best not see this on any shady land deals) :D
 
The last word:

Nyah, nyah ! :)

PS - can't wait till Wed. when I will go
off to the boonies in TX with RKBA loving
PROFESSORS and Shiner. Hope I don't bust
my lip again with the 12 gauage. Duh.
 
I ignored this thread for awhile, but I'm glad I finally took a look at it.

You'll like this, but I agree with both 'sides' to some extent.

Was the guy crude and in their face? Sure. But he really got their attention, didn't he? Did he hurt the RKBA? To be frank, I doubt it. If we all talked this way, or even a majority of us, then yes, I think that would be damaging. But, he really got some people thinking ...

Sometimes the fringe of a movement tends to make the rest of the movement seem even more reasonable.

My bet is that some folks involved in this give and take now have a little 'cognitive dissonance' in their subconscious. Something is bugging them about this exchange, and it isn't simply the so-called comparison of a vagina to a handgun.

And, the claim of '... unnecessary for Deming to take an argument concerning gun control and turn it into an argument against women’s sexuality.'? That is just silly. Deming did no such thing - this is simply another feminazi talking.

Finally, whether this met some federal or other standard of 'sexual harassment' matters little to me. Trouble for Deming? Sure. But, one of the things that bothers many of us these days is the supposition that violation of some law or regulation is ipso facto immoral or unethical. We have certainly reached the point that there are so many, and so many poorly conceived laws and regulations, that violations don't even raise my eyebrows anymore. It all depends on the law or reg.

I'm glad Glenn has accomplished so much with a gentle, reasoned touch. Most of us employ that method. But, I'm also glad there are a few Demings out there that will zing the anti-self defense movement between the eyes from time to time. Reminds me of a fellow named Vin ...

Regards from AZ
 
I'm with Glenn.
State your case with stats and leave the bad analogies to the uneducated.

Pro-gun needs politically correct advocates,because PC means more voters on our side.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top