I’m surprised by a lot of comments on Bitter’s post about advertising we noticed advertising guns as “man toys.” A lot of people seem to believe we’re trying to join the Political Correctness gestapo, or something like that. There’s a world of difference between railing against any gender-specific advertising, and suggesting that maybe we ought to re-think some forms of gender specific advertising that damage the cause. We were engaging in the latter.
I’m convinced that one of our biggest factors that is helping us win both culturally and politically is because we’ve managed to narrow the gender gap on guns ever so slightly, but it is still too large. Here are some facts to consider when deciding whether classifying guns as “man toys” is beneficial or detrimental to the cause of gun rights:
- Women are generally more politically engaged than men are.
- Women represent 20% of votes in the Senate, and 18.5% of votes in the House.
- Women hold 5 governorships.
- One third of the Justices on the Supreme Court are women, as are 53 of the 154 active judges on the federal bench are female.
- Most gun control groups market specifically to women, and brand themselves women’s groups for a reason.
- Women generally control household spending.
So given that, is it really a good idea for people in the gun business to engage in advertising that alienates women along a heavily traveled highway? I think the answer is an emphatic “no.” I’m surprised there are so many people who disagree.