by C. Dodd Harris IV
muaddib@free-market.net

March 13, 2002

Susan Reimer tells the story of Christie Caywood, a remarkable young woman who, at age 21, is attracting nationwide notoriety by trying to raise awareness about self-defense and the Second Amendment at Mount Holyoke College. But Mzz. Reimer is so blinkered by her own ideology, she cannot appreciate that this young lady is spearheading a movement. Instead, she pats herself on the back for having been an activist when she was in college and laments that "the unhindered right to carry a gun" is the issue Miss Caywood finds worthy of pursuing.

It's worth a look, then, at the 'worth' of firearms to a feminist (defined herein in its original formulation: One who believes in equality before the law on truly equal terms). Guns are tools, as Caywood duly notes. They are mere objects with no inherent moral virtue or vice. As with any tool, their moral weight derives from the use to which they are put. We have recently learned, at heavy cost, that box cutters can be an instrument of evil, while guns and "daisy cutters" the essentials of liberation. 

So, what moral weight do Christy Caywood's guns have? Her purpose is to educate the other women of Mount Holyoke about self-defense. Is there anything there? Why, yes, as it happens: A gun is a great equalizer and has a very high utility for women seeking to protect themselves from unwanted aggression, especially from larger, stronger men. In fact, studies on concealed carry laws indicate that, while every permit has a positive effect on violent crime rates, permits held by women have four times the effect in reducing violent crime against women - whether they have a permit or not - as do permits held by men for men.

So, Reimer could laud Caywood for standing up for women's empowerment, but her ideology prohibits doing so - guns are bad, so Caywood's cause is a matter to be regretted, not celebrated. Still, Reimer could choose to follow up her own I-was-an-activist-first self-congratulations by extolling the fact that, whatever the cause, Caywood has stood up for something she believes in and celebrate it as an example of the success of the women's movement. Or, she could simply have left well enough alone.

Instead, Reimer rues that "women's movement has finally turned in upon itself" if carrying a gun is a "galvanizing issue." It's a shame that Reimer's ideology requires her to demean the activism of a young woman who's taken to the trenches for her beliefs instead of allowing her to see that the women's movement was an essential foundation for Caywood to have the freedom to speak out.

C. Dodd Harris IV is a contributor to KeepAndBearArms.com and the proprietor of Ipse Dixit.