Green Room

New explanation for supporting gun rights: Too much testosterone?

posted at 9:37 am on December 20, 2012 by

Via the Examiner. Tonight on “Piers Morgan”: Are mandatory estrogen supplements the answer?

By the way, this guy was a Rhodes Scholar.

Recently in the Green Room:

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

“There’s something wrong with gun-rights advocates. They’re not like you or me, reasonable voter. We need to Do Something.”

Dehumanizing a group of society. That always ends well.

Meric1837 on December 20, 2012 at 9:43 AM

I thought people who owned guns were all closet fairies with teeny tiny penises. Sheesh, the science changes every day.

Seth Halpern on December 20, 2012 at 9:51 AM

“It is founded in the fantasy of testosterone laden individuals who have blood on their hands for articulating that idea.”

So, if I disagree with the gun haters and say so publicly, I’m now partially responsible for murder. He manages to trash the First and Second Amendments in one sentence. These people are totalitarian lunatics.

RadClown on December 20, 2012 at 9:56 AM

Estimated number of American women who own guns btw: 15 million.

Seth Halpern on December 20, 2012 at 10:07 AM

So does that make this guy an estrogen-fueled sissy boy?

changer1701 on December 20, 2012 at 10:10 AM

Rhodes Scholar? Well, so was Kris Kristofferson.

ConservativeLA on December 20, 2012 at 10:22 AM

Are we to believe that Morgan isn’t already taking estrogen supplements? Or at the very least, taking testosterone suppressants?

Jeddite on December 20, 2012 at 10:22 AM

I thought people who owned guns were all closet fairies with teeny tiny penises. Sheesh, the science changes every day.

Seth Halpern on December 20, 2012 at 9:51 AM

What I want to know is, that does Phrenology have to say about gun owners? Once we know that, the science will be settled.

ConservativeLA on December 20, 2012 at 10:25 AM

“You’re a two-bit guy. No guts, nothing. I want action.”

- Annie Laurie Starr, Gun Crazy (1950)

Seth Halpern on December 20, 2012 at 10:59 AM

The sad thing about this? The GOP in Connecticut couldn’t even beat this guy in a GOP wave year in a marginal Democratic seat.

Safe Seats breed simple minds.

Rocks on December 20, 2012 at 11:04 AM

Dehumanizing a group of society. That always ends well.

Meric1837 on December 20, 2012 at 9:43 AM

And they got all crocodile-tears indignant over Sarah Palin’s “Real Americans”. They can stuff it, as far as I’m concerned.

JeffWeimer on December 20, 2012 at 11:35 AM

I thought people who owned guns were all closet fairies with teeny tiny penises. Sheesh, the science changes every day.

The way I remember it, gun owners were compensating for small penises and poor performance in bed, rather than homosexuality. This was a point of view was promoted by Dr. Joyce Brothers, whose husband was a gun owner, leading to speculation that her opinion was based on personal experience.

Socratease on December 20, 2012 at 11:35 AM

We need more testosterone, not less. I am happily married so I am not out on the prowl, but I am increasingly surprised at the number of men I assume to be gay that are actually straight.

I heard women complaining about having toy guns around. Sorry that isn’t the problem, and did any of the women whining about these toy guns wonder if these kids are wanting to grow up to be “good guys” that protect us? Or do we not need it you know since we got all that birth control, abortion and videos on how to cover up when we get our faces beat in?

earlgrey133 on December 20, 2012 at 11:57 AM

There’s no such thing as “too much testosterone.” That’s like saying “too much bacon.”

Red Cloud on December 20, 2012 at 12:44 PM