CNN went there today, blaming the Jovan Belcher murder-suicide on a “culture of manliness.” CNN published a column by Democrat Kevin Powell that argues that Belcher’s act was the summit of a too-male culture.
Belcher was a man living in the supersized macho world of football, a world in which many of us American males reside, be it football or not. Too many of us have been taught manhood in a way that is not healthy. Be tough, men do not cry, man up — these are the things I’ve heard my entire life, and I now cringe when I hear this relayed to boys or younger men by teachers, coaches, fathers, mentors and leaders.
—
That is the problem for so many of us. We do not talk about much of anything, except sports, women and sex. Everything else is routinely ignored. Or repressed. Until we explode.
It’s politically incorrect to suggest that Belcher was living anything but a manly life. But the fact is, he was living in a world most of us dream of reaching, yet he never lived up to his most important responsibility.
Let’s look at his life. Was it manly of him to have a child out of wedlock? Was it manly of him to abuse drugs and alcohol, as he has been reported to have done, especially after he had become a father? Was it manly of him to go on what looks like a jealous rage that ended with him murdering the mother of his child? Was Jovan Belcher’s life a manly life at all?
I will submit to you that it was not. There was nothing manly about Jovan Belcher’s life. A real man takes real responsibility by getting married before having children. A real man does not resort to chemicals to escape from his problems. A real man does not ever become a menace to the mother of his children. Ever.
Jovan Belcher was responsible for his actions. The evidence that has emerged since Saturday suggests that he was a product of a culture that substitutes real manliness for something false. It’s spiritual. It’s killing our nation.
We don’t know what was going on in Jovan Belcher’s mind. We don’t know what was going on between Belcher and his victim, Kassandra Parker. I don’t and nor do Kevin Powell and Jason Whitlock and Bob Costas. And that’s the point. We don’t know. Exploiting this heinous act is opportunistic, irresponsible, and inflammatory.
The left is exploiting the tragedy, in the words of Whitlock, to marginalize the “gun culture.” What is that culture? Does it exist? Does Whitlock even know?
The phrase “gun culture” suggests more than just firearms and the right to bear them. “Gun culture” implies more, a world. What is that world?
Well, attend any gun show and you’re likely to see what it is that so bothers liberals. It’s not just the firearms and ammunition, or the other weaponry and security gear on display. It’s the opposition to government control that really bothers them. They don’t like that some people will fight with all their spirit to be free.
Some, like Whitlock, also despise the “gun culture” because they perceive it as white.
The “gun culture” is about real manliness, in the form of recognizing potential threats before they’re standing in your hallway at midnight menacing you and your loved ones. The “gun culture” is about the responsible use of firearms through attention to safety. The “gun culture” is about the freedom to live your own life, have your own thoughts, and resist coercion.
Liberals just cannot abide that. So they attack it.
Its like when they say “Car Culture” only more so.
“Belcher was a man living in the supersized macho world of football”
Which is why Peyton Manning also did a murder-suicide. Oh, wait. . .
+1
And we all – at least those of us who are dumb ass conservatives..bitter clingers too – know that guns kill and NOT people…what a load of hooey and phooey…
But if one is a revolutionary leftist, gunning for total control, then it more than makes sense that the gun made the sicko football player kill! Vomit.
No matter. The meme will be repeated until there is no other play left, or until the revolutionary left dislodges LEGAL guns from American’s hands – http://adinakutnicki.com/2012/10/27/obamas-america-entering-the-parallel-universe-of-radical-politics-gone-haywire-a-short-path-to-dictatorship-addendum-to-gunning-for-tea-party-activists-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki/
They never tire of their end goal – TOTAL control over the populace!
So that’s why OJ did it.
This is not off-topic. This is key.
15 years ago, I knew a guy named Joe. He was working on his Ph.D. in philosophy. Unlike most philosophy students, Joe was not a self-absorbed prick. He was a fun guy who genuinely enjoyed philosophy. His job was building inspector for the state of Massachusetts. Joe was a lawyer’s worst nightmare. He knew the Mass building code by heart, and I mean that literally. He had a ferocious memory and a brain that could launch a space shuttle into Mars’ orbit. Do not mess with Joe when it comes to fact, detail and reason.
Joe was a liberal (big shock. He’s born and bred in Mass). He was good company and knew how to socialize with people, but he was a card carrying liberal to the bone. His major thing in life was philosophy, but he did have an interest in history: The Volstead Act (Prohibition). He had a library of 87 books on Prohibition. He knew EVERYTHING about the Prohibition years. He could tell you where Al Capone bought his underwear (Sulkas).
One day, I think it was Superbowl Sunday, Joe is with us in Newburyport, Mass, and we’ve got a member of the US Secret Service with us. Before the game, the subject of guns comes up. Gun control. The Second Amendment. Joe puts down his beer and is about to chime in. We can hardly wait. Here it comes. The usual liberal spew.
Joe tells us that if the Second Amendment were to be on the board for repeal, the smartest thing we could do is cash in our chips, grab our kids and run for our lives. Get out of the US and I mean now. Not like Alec Baldwin pissing about how if George W. Bush is re-elected, he’s emigrating. I mean ESCAPE for your lives. As fast as you can. Instantly.
We are stunned.
Then he spends about another 45 minutes telling us precisely how and why all of our lives are in jeopardy if we remain in the US when the Second Amendment is about to be repealed. The science. The history. The legalities. The strategy. The tactics. The key players. Everything.
I have never in my life heard an argument for the sanctity of the Second Amendment, why it must be upheld at all costs. And this, from a liberal. The guy never owned a gun, hates guns, and spent nearly an hour telling us why the Second Amendment is crucial to the survival of the United States.
There’s one out there who gets it. And he’s a full-blown liberal. You repeal the Second Amendment and this country will explode into a conflagration of insanity that we have not seen since the Civil War. I only wish I had his lecture on tape to transcribe. No conservative has ever made such an iron-clad case for civil ownership of firearms. Not ever.
Gun culture my fat Irish ass. Gun science is closer to the mark.
This may be projection, but if the last thing I see of my life is my beautiful spouse being raped while I bleed to death from a stab wound, then give me security you SOB’s.
I mean the progessives as SOBitches
I cannot for the life of me find one thing that Belcher ever did, at least in the public record, that was manly. Macho perhaps, but not manly.
Defend the helpless, give your child a stable home with married parents, take care of your obligations, be generous with your abundance, cherish your spouse, stay sober, be kind. That is the culture of manliness. Possession of a penis no more makes you a man than possession of a guitar makes you Chuck Barry.
Belcher may have been male, but he was no man.
Oops, Chuck Berry. Sorry about that.
“Possession of a penis no more makes you a man than possession of a guitar makes you Chuck Berry.”
Printing the bumper stickers right now. First one goes to Eddie Van Halen. Let me know what percentage you require.
Johnny B. Goode forgives you.
PJM definitely needs to junk this commentary format in favor of one that lets us edit our posts. Disqus and Intense Debate top the list.
Well put! Macho does not equal manly; macho is a cheap, Hollywoodesque imitation of manly.
Manly is taking on a commitment, e.g. to stay married or to support your family or to protect your loved ones, and standing by that commitment with no excuses or apologies. Macho is pretending to do these things because they look good.
Ask a man if he owns a gun. The macho answer is “Hell yeah! It’s a .45 with laser sights and high capacity mags, filled with hollow-points; wanna see it?” The manly answer is “None of your business”… or perhaps a subtler answer to leave the questioner in doubt (because it really IS none of their business).
I don’t know Belcher, but he sounds a lot more macho than manly to me.
When I saw the headline my first thought was “he is no where near manly in life or other wise.”
I don’t know what his life was like, so I can’t say what made him reach this point of desperation or anger. But my grandpa taught me what it means to be a man. It includes not crying at every scrape or cut, but allows crying at the funeral of a loved one. Especially at the death of a child. It means, rather than being a threat to children (meaning any children) and their mothers, you place yourself in front of them to protect them from the hazards of the world. It means working hard to support them financially and when its play time, teach them to be not only gracious when they lose, but as gracious when they win. It does not include getting paid obscene amounts of money to play a game or role play on tv and then father numerous children out of wedlock out of self adoration. It does not mean talking rude or obnoxious to people that you disagree with. It means conducting every relationship in a manner that is fair, mutually beneficial and good for your community. It does no mean yelling at an umpire, coach or other official of your kid’s little league game for any reason. You can object to a call, but rudeness teaches your children it’s ok to be a bully to get your way. When your kid’s team loses, you don’t demand a trophy for showing up, you help your kid work harder for the next contest. It is not protesting against your government by destroying private property and demanding attention. It is participating in the election process, staying informed encouraging your children to be informed as well. It is to teach you children patriotism for the freedoms we hold dear, by setting an example.
I could go on and on, but as the author said, Belcher along with the idiots spouting this crap, are anything but manly. They are a sad example of what our society has defined as manhood in a “mondern age”. But they are anything but manly.
The gun culture Belcher belonged to was not a white one. I suspect, he may have had no father, listened to rap, and grew up around the black gun culture of gangs.
I could be wrong, but I suspect the man carried problems from his early life. It is a life, or gun culture the Democrats continue to grow in the inner cities.
I feel sorry for my fellow Americans having to grow up in the lie the Democrats give them. BLT Marxism gives them the same lie.
And look at all the excessive gun violence in Liberal movies and in video games. They should be outlawed.
Homeland Security should set up scanning facilities at all entrances to the South Side of Chicago, Wash. D.C., L.A., Oakland, and Detroit.
You know what should be outlawed? Calls to outlaw speech.
I know plenty of people who have entertained themselves with video games — and even, back in the day, role playing games — who have never hurt a fly.
You know what makes monsters? A little bad genetics, a lot bad parenting. The choice of entertainment media? Not so much. You can isolate a kid from every bad influence and still raise a monster.
I’m pretty sure he was being sarcastic. Hillary Clinton really does think like that though.
I just Googled “Jovan Belcher’s father”. No hits. Also, no surprise.
Good points all. I feel very careful about making assumptions about folks, even when the circumstances are apparently clear. Generalizing in my view is not only the basis for racism, it is the basis for marxism as well…nasty thing. I would suspect this man was significantly immature, both emotionally as well a culturally. It is sad for him and his child’s moterh as well as the child. All of us, both men and women mautre at different times. Sadly, some of us never do. One of the great lessons to be learned in our journey is: IT’S NOT ALL ABOUT ME. In Christianity that would start with loving thy neighbor. Prayers out to all involved in that horrible event. Costas and other ‘masterminds’ who are so quick to simplify such a tragis and complicated situation should be ashamed, it is they who must mature…and remember what constitutes LIBERTY is not to be simplified away on their unknowledgable impressions. Semper Fi.
CNN published a column by Democrat Kevin Powell that argues that Belcher’s act was the summit of a too-male culture.
I suppose we could have male babies ‘clipped’ at birth as a ‘cure’?
Well, there’s not a whole lot of gun violence, or any other kind, in the Orthodox Jewish community, so maybe this actually does work…
We’re already heading there, e.g. Ritalin to keep the males under control in grade schools, non aggressive play, etc. etc. etc. The castration of the American male is well underway. Just like with cattle, it will fatten us and reduce aggression.
That should read culture of machismo, not manliness. The culture he describes is indeed about being macho, in your face, winning at any price and “respect.” What it isn’t is manly. Compare macho behavior with manly behavior like John Wayne or more commonly the guy who gets up at 5 in the morning, shuffles off to work for his wife and kids and avoids trouble even when there are chances to act a fool.
More simply: compare rap or pro wresting to Kipling’s “If.” If you don’t get it after that, you never will.
Perhaps the discussion should be about the “concussion culture”. Isn’t the poor man’s scrambled brain part of the problem?
Belcher was 25, and it takes years for head trauma to develop into those kinds of problems. Plus, the Chiefs have stated that Belcher did not have a hisotry of significant head injury although the family claims otherwise. Of course, the team might be lying, but with today’s charged climate about head injuries, such a lie would/will almost certainly be exposed and any response will be quite harsh, so why would the team lie?
Now, I can believe that he was using male steroids, and they might have made him aggressive and paranoid. I have also heard that he was on anti-depressants and I know from personal experience and from a family anecdote that those things can suddenly and violently destabilize your moods.
But the head trauma thing I am much less convinced of. I think if most likely that Belcher was a young man who never learned how to properly deal with his issues, both emotional and physical, and turned to alcohol and drugs as a means of coping. Then, he went over the edge and did something he regretted and took the cowards way out rather than face the responsibility of what he’d done.
He was a life-long star athlete. That means he never had to study to pass in school, never had to work at relationships to be popular, never had to do anything but focus on a single task — playing football well.
That is not what makes a well-rounded, mature man.
I would assume that by the time you’re 25 years old in the NFL you’ve been playing football for at least 10 years since your freshman year in high school, if not earlier, so that’s certainly plenty of time for the concussions to build up.
And a thousand smaller concussions do plenty of cumulative damage, no matter what the team says.
That said, I agree that steroid use and other issues from his family history to drug use and ego all contributed as well.
Steroids (do not have to be male steroids, whatever that is) can make you very tired, extremely aggressive, and very angry at anything, and everyone.
I know, I was taking prednisone for a spider bite, and that one steroid did all of that to me. Now, if he was on multiple steroids, well that could be your answer right there for the murder of his girlfriend and suicide of himself.
Clearly the gun went berserk; It shot the girlfriend nine times. Was that necessary? Was she a Conservative?
William Shatner on gun control:
http://www.break.com/usercontent/2009/10/william-shatner-on-gun-control-1464048
They were good guns all their lives until they went over the edge and killed somebody.
These guns must have come from a bad neighborhood.
“What Do Liberals Mean by ‘Gun Culture’ Anyway?”
Nothing. It’s simply a neat bumper-sticker phrase to wield against evil conservatives as if it had meaning.
Very much like “socail justice”, “fairness”, and other sweet-sounding but ultimately hollow undefined phrases.
It’s not “gun culture” you’re referring to Mr. Whitlock, it’s “thug culture.”
Only thugs see a “convenience-store confrontation over loud music coming from a car” as a reason to shoot someone down.
Here’s what Mr. Whtilock said today in an interview: (from Twitchy)”I believe the NRA is the new KKK. And that the arming of so many black youths, uh, and loading up our community with drugs, and then just having an open shooting gallery, is the work of people who obviously don’t have our best interests [at heart].”
So we see where this guy is coming from. Keep making excuses for the thugs Mr. Whitlock.
Someone should tell Whitlock that the NRA doean’t want irresponsible thugs armed anymore than he does.
Not to mention that the first American gun control laws were passed in the post-Reconstruction South expressly to disarm the emancipated former-slave population. Look it up…
I’m sorry, werewife, but that’s not quite so. Even before the United States was founded, several colonies passed laws to prohibit Indians, slaves, and freed slaves from possessing firearms.
That peculiar fact aside, well into the twentieth century, the vast majority of so-called “gun control” laws were enacted with the more often openly than quietly declared intent to prevent racial groups, first and foremost blacks, from keeping and bearing arms. It’s no longer socially acceptable in “liberal” circles to advocate singling out young, poorly educated, unmarried urban non-white males for legal sanctions, but that’s whom they’ve feared since the middle 1960s.
Now, will I be told I’m posting comments too frequently? Why, if I overlook a typographic error, can’t I click an Edit button and fix it?
OK, I give up. How do I get the green cotton ad to shut uP?
It is interesting to look up Kevin Powell on Wikipedia. He lists his “career” as an “activist” first—which means that he is a professional racist.
Second is the following:
So it appears that Mr. Powell has had a little bit of trouble tamping down the same demons as Mr. Belcher.
Manly. I don’t think that word means what they think it means.
Manly? Well, biologically male, yes…
Being irresponsible, reprehensible, immature and having lots of muscles while making lots of money doesn’t make you ‘manly’. A spoiled child, perhaps, but not ‘manly’.
Acting like a responsible adult and taking up your responsibilities without one complaint, cleaning up your life, admitting your lacks and overcoming them… now THAT is manly.
Guns have nothing to do with it. Taking up the duties of an adult, do.
He was no man. You are a man when you accept the responsibilities of a man.
Frankly, I don’t think the author’s definition of “gun culture” holds any more water than the liberals’. Patriotism and support of the 2nd Amendment have nothing to do with a “gun culture”, any more than mere ownership and use of firearms does. If ” gun culture” means anything, beyond a liberal strawman, it seems to me it has something to do with macho, tough guy nonsense. That nonsense is as obviously bent whether it comes from a gang thug or some “patriot” bragging thatr he can’t wait for the revolution because, “we got the guns”. Same BS, “lookit me, I’m a tough guy, a real man!”
Guns are tools, sometimes playthings (think a family trip to the skeet range),
but they, as others above have said, have nothing to do with being a man, or, for that matter, with being tough.
The progs smell blood in the water, thinking Obama’s victory is a signal to launch a general assault on traditional America. The “gun culture”, whatever that is, is a primary target. They want to disarm Americans, because the progs are scared shitless of that part of the country that will eventually push back on the inevitable Marxist overreach headed our way.
http://www.wkyt.com/home/headlines/Captured-escapee-has-strong-words-for-people-who-helped-police-find-him-181910121.html
Here’s what we’re dealing with.
I think liberals mean that it’s more humane to be killed by someone from a knife culture than the gun culture: how else can one explain their scapegoating of George Zimmerman for using a gun while OJ got off for using a knife when he was guilty as hell? To bad the gloves that didn’t fit were not sap gloves loaded with lead. In sum, apparently belly shooting is bad while throat cutting is good, especially if the victims happen to be white, Jewish, female, and convenient political throw downs for democratic advantage and talking points. The second amendment is pretty general, referring specifically to “arms,” which could mean knives, guns, clubs, or a size 13 logging boot up the wazzo. Unfortunately most liberals have never been mugged by a boot up their reality and I wonder if the Golden Gate Bridge should count as a weapons platform for its facilitation of suicides by jumpers? So apparently a gun for fun is bad, but a banana in a condom is good, unless the sexual education training aid is in the hands of a sex crazed sixth grader goosing Barbie on the play ground during kiddie culture recess and thus requiring little Kenny to register as a sex offender.
The bearing of arms is the essential medium through which the individual asserts both his social power and his participation in politics as a responsible moral being… (Historian J.G.A. Pocock, describing the beliefs of the founders of the U.S.)
This quote begins an excellent disquisition by Eric Raymond that he titles, “Ethics from the Barrel of a Gun.” I recommend it highly to anyone who has any interest in the subject of gun ownership, pro or con.
http://www.catb.org/esr/guns/gun-ethics.html
Kent
As usual I have no idea what these F-ing libs are talking about. I was in the US Army for 3 years long ago, trained with weapons yet never owned one until many years later.. The people I met who were ‘gun cultured’ were some of the most sane, safe, responsible people I’ve ever met. The nuts that we saw at the ranges were your typical a-hole lib with some chromed monster gun that broke their wrists when fired.. and they could not hold a 10 foot group at 10 yards.. I could do better chucking rocks. Given a choice to live around the ‘gun culture’ vs the minority gang culture, guess which one I choose? And I don’t mean the ‘gun nut culture’.. I mean individuals who take safety as number one. If the government has a problem with us, then we must be doing something right.
Unfortunately the regulations about who gets gun licenses and guns are not strict enough. The rights of the mentally ill supersede the rights of others around him or her. No one should have a RIGHT to have a gun. It is not a necessity and people who are impaired mentally either by illness or by anger problems should not have them.
I remember the “snake pit” stories and how badly patients in mental hospitals were treated. However, the pendulum has radically shifted the other way. There are plenty of situations in which a person should be locked up to prevent him or her from hurting others. When all those people were released from mental hospitals no one considered them enough to make sure they got their medications and had a place to live
“But the fact is, he was living in a world most of us dream of reaching…”
You are no different than the idiots you put down. Not me or anyone I know.
“Gun culture is a buzz phrase for urban, black, violent, anti-social. Yup that is what they mean but will not say.
I wish Kevin Powell was a bloody homosexual.
Post WWII a high ranking Japanese Admiral was asked , “Why Japan never invaded
America ” ? He replied , “There is a gun behind evey blade of grass in America” .
I rest my case for 2nd Amendment support.
The present administration has already adopted a plan to disarm American Citizens . Why this was not addressed in any of the debates is beyond my scope of comprehension.Disarming Citizens is a major strategy of Socialism.
I give you Mao ,Stalin , Castro and Obama and Saul Alinsky. The upside is we will be able to ward off our enemy (Government) with free “O” phones.
The so-called “gun culture” is actually a product of the liberal left. While liberals complain about the number of guns and amount of gun violence in our nation, their Hollywood buddies are the ones exploiting such violence by making the majority of films/games they create filled with images and story lines around the use of guns to kill their various story characters. If they‘re so against guns in the hands of citizens, why do they so blatantly advertise such violence? They seem to be the ones setting the role model for gun use and violence, which makes absolutely no sense, proving the enormous hypocrisy of the left. I dare them to walk the walk by making more films absent of gun violence. I bet their sales would drop dramatically, however, because these images are now so ingrained and expected in our culture, movie goers and game players would be quite bored. Thanks, Hollywood and liberals . . . you’re the ones to blame for the so-called “gun culture,” and you ought to be ashamed.