I’d like to know why the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review thought it was remotely acceptable to publish something as vile as this:
The ACLU seems to be attempting to alter that image. Its offerings at the David L. Lawrence Convention Center will include a ladies-only seminar teaching them how to organize a protest.
To most women, such a seminar probably wouldn’t have the same appeal as, say, a holistic facial at the day spa. But providing people with relaxed, radiant faces isn’t part of the ACLU’s mission.
It’s just a theory. But I think that before more women start attending the ACLU convention, more of them will have to be informed. …
Women likely won’t consider participating in public assemblies or speaking out against government policies if they are concerned that:
– Spending several hundred dollars on a protest permit might leave them without enough money to get the full treatment at that next visit to the day spa.
– Carrying a political pamphlet in a small purse would leave less room for more important items, such as lipstick or compact.
– The heavy clothing required to successfully protest outside in cooler weather would make them appear frumpy.
– Dirt and grass might stain the new Coach shoes they just bought at Macy’s.
– The printing press smell when the signs are printed could totally overwhelm the Chanel they’re wearing.
– Most sign poles come only in one boring color: wood.
– Spouting political opinions simply isn’t sexy.
Well, they did publish just such an attack, but I guess they deemed it acceptable since the right that Heyl mocks is the Second Amendment instead of the First. It’s also the NRA being attacked as opposed to the ACLU.
The reason I made changes to the column is to highlight that this isn’t about guns. This piece is flat out sexist against women who engage in any activity that doesn’t involve a mall and credit card. I thought we moved past those days back in 1950. It would seem the Tribune wants to bring those days back. Because how dare women get so uppity as to make serious decisions about things like political issues and personal issues such as self-defense.
There is no justification for this column. It has nothing to do with disagreement on the political issue, nor is it an examination of the gender participation in either the shooting sports or political field. It merely brushes across those topics in order to poorly disguise an attack on women.
For those would don’t share Heyl’s view that women are unable to occupy themselves beyond thinking about facials, lipstick, perfume, and clothes, you can email him at firstname.lastname@example.org or call him at 412-320-7857.
And shame on the gun store that participated in this load of bull – Anthony Arms & Accessories. Perhaps the reason the manager cites poor sales to women at his store is because he’s happy to paint a picture of the shooting sports as a man’s world, as evidenced by his attack on NRA as simply a boy’s club. I gave them the benefit of the doubt that perhaps the words were misconstrued, and they had no intention of working with such an anti-woman (and presumably anti-gun) columnist, but with no retraction on their website even after well over 12 hours of the story being live, it would appear they stand by their statements.
27 Responses to “Eric Heyl Hates Women”
- Sexist Pig | The Minuteman - [...] Breda, Bitter and Joe Janelle Barnett's [...]
- SayUncle » Speaking of chicks* and guns - [...] idiot named Eric Heyl says that NRA’s efforts at getting women involved in shooting are misguided because women should …
- Apparently Women Shouldn’t Be Getting Into Shooting Sports « A Geek With Guns - [...] that there are still people in this world who believe a woman’s place is in the kitchen. Bitter over …