Paxton Quigley

Tam notes that someone from the 1990s girls with guns culture has turned on the cause. You can put me squarely in the “Paxton Who?” camp. I had never heard of this woman before Tam’s post just now. Tam notes:

Jesus, Paxton, et tu?

It only takes one awshit to erase a dozen attagirls. I’m washing my hands of her. Let the Zumboing commence.

Zumbo was someone well known. I’m guessing Ms. Quigley is one of the many self-promoters in this issue whose day in the sun passed long ago. Do all political issues attract the kinds of self-promoters we do?

UPDATE: Apparently she has a blog.

15 thoughts on “Paxton Quigley”

  1. Showing my age, but she was pretty big doing the women’s tv show circuit back in the early days of the shall-issue movement. Her “Armed and Female” was a definite recommendation for women back then when the carry movement more resembled the stereotype of “white guys” the anti’s still hold today.

    Somebody of her generation, Ayoob or Bane or Rogers for instance, should get her to the range with an AR and give her her “Zumbo-sees-the-light” chance.

    Heck, that’ll get her press.

  2. “Do all political issues attract the kinds of self-promoters we do?”

    The quick answer is “yes,” but I’m wondering if self-promotion hasn’t increased sharply in recent years, as people perceive that the chances of achieving anything important politically are becoming less and less, so, why not cash in on the way down?

    Of course, it is possible I just didn’t see it before, because I couldn’t begin to count how many self-promoters, at how many levels, I’ve wasted my time on in my life, and not recognized they were nothing but self-promoters until 10 or 20 years later. Maybe it’s always been this way, but now I’m nearly grown up — when it’s probably too late.

  3. I won’t comment on the irony of someone who has a blog complaining about self-promoters :)

    But then again, I think most people who have been successful into this medium got there by falling into it a bit accidentally, rather than through any kind of marketing. The unfortunate thing is, the way I and a lot of other people got into this medium is now largely closed off. Someone starting today would find it very difficult to establish an audience without being good at self-promotion.

  4. I probably cite it too often, but I’ve always thought Nock’s c. 1937 essay “Isaiah’s Job” contained a lot of wisdom. Basically it says that anyone who goes into the business of being a “prophet,” but is seeking a mass audience (Nock called it becoming a “mass-man”) dooms their own message, because they will modify their message to please an audience, rather than provide a pure message that will attract only the best among potential adherents. Once they begin tailoring their message, what is the point?

    Assuming you do only what is necessary to make it possible to continue your blog, call it like you see it, at present, and aren’t trying to become another PJ Media, you are adhering fairly well to Nock’s ideal, I’d say. Just be careful if anyone makes you any attractive offers to attempt bigger and better things.

    Without knowing (or caring) a lot about Paxton Quigley, my guess is she took the mass-man route, a long time ago, so now needs to be a welcome and frequently invited guest by the mass media. They own a big piece of her message.

    1. I don’t really have time for bigger and better things, and nothing in this medium pays enough to buy that time. I’ve generally not been of the mindset of saying things I think people want to hear, though, there are fights I’ve decided not to pick just because I don’t want to deal with the bullshit.

    2. Another aspect of “Isaiah’s Job” that also resonates with me is the idea that the Isaiahs of the world, when they are properly sharing their message, they are also preparing a “remnant”, who will be able to bring forth the message when the time is right.

      There are times when I think the best thing I could do is something reminiscent of Isaac Asimov’s Foundation: collect as much math, science, engineering, Austrian economics, history and literature as I could, and then make sure that my children are taught it; then, when society collapses, then perhaps my children and/or grandchildren will hopefully be in a position to rebuild civilization.

      The funny thing is, such a library could probably fit nicely on a 16 Gigabyte SD card…but if civilization collapses, there isn’t much of a chance of being able to read that card….

  5. Way back – early 1990s – I seem to recall some info circulating about “Paxton Quigley” that mentioned her real name was Judy Something-or-other, and that she had worked somewhat strenuously in the anti-gun movement. I seem to remember someone referring to a connection between “Judy_____” and the National Coalition to Ban Handguns in D.C.

    Armed and Female has a copyright date of 1989, and the preface, written by “Paxton Quigley” and carrying a date of 1988, references her anti-gun work after the 1968 assassination of Robert Kennedy, on whose presidential campaign staff she states she worked in Washington, D.C., and states “I campaigned vociferously for handgun controls” and “…along with other staff members and astronaut John Glenn founded the first anti-gun political action committee – the National Committee for Handgun Control…..”

    So, whomever she really is, it appears her roots are in the anti-gun movement. Not that people can’t change, and she has, to what degree only she knows, but it doesn’t surprise me that the desire to regulate, while seemingly well below the surface, is still there.

  6. It is always worthwhile to look for literary allusions — some of them quite bold, but unoriginal — in the aliases people choose, and “Paxton Quigley” is a made-up name if I ever heard one.

    According to a Wikipedia article, the character “Paxton Quigley” is from the play “Three in the Attic,” and is described as ” a lothario who swears his fidelity to all three of the women he is dating, who are unaware of his deception.”

    Hmmm. Three identities, and those deceived unaware of the deception. Wonder what that could mean?

  7. Andy,

    That you are over-analyzing. =) Anon, this isn’t some deep cover stunt from 30 years ago. Her story and identity are all common knowledge, at least by us who were active in the carry movement back then. She was anti-gun, got mugged, started pushing for women’s carry. Same story as thousands of pro-carry people.

    That she hasn’t advanced in her thinking about carry from it being a necessary privilege/option in a “just society” to realizing that it is an integral part of a fundamental right, and thus that there are -no- “reasonable limits”, simply makes her a member of probably the largest group of gun owners/carriers: those that aren’t political/ideological about it.

    She simply lacks or has lacked the willingness (or the reason) to take her personal philosophy of self-defense to its logical, internally consistent, conclusion. Which makes her someone in need of education, not someone “evil.”

    1. Thanks for the education. I may have been around awhile, but somehow she is someone who never caught my attention or interest. So, the analysis is a spot of fun, anyway. :-)

      1. No worries.

        I get a little too, call it strident, in my responses sometimes out of frustration over the speed at which some pro-gun folks leap to propounding conspiracy theories.

        There’s a seemingly modern trend to not wanting to be thought a “sucker” so the default position is over-cynicism and suspicion rather than reasoned consideration. Alex Jones and his modern day Bircher talk radio ilk feed it, and then the more informed and rational folks on “our side” are tarred by the conspiracy folk’s paranoid nonsense in the eyes of the undecided middle.

  8. ‘There’s a seemingly modern trend to not wanting to be thought a “sucker”‘

    That’s because there’s a modern trend to there being more sucker-bait out there than anything else.

Comments are closed.