It's pretty much universally accepted that guns are phallic symbols; symbols of power, of manhood, of awe. It's been that way with every generation's weapon of choice since the days of tree branches and jagged rocks. It's also pretty much universally accepted that homo sapiens are almost hard-wired for war, for conflict, for self-expression in the most linear fashion imaginable. For males this results in a cult of both masculinity and masochism, a sort of constant voice in their heads whispering that the powerful weapon they're carrying between their legs could be severed at any time, thus draining them of potency and rendering them castrati in the most disconcerting of ways.
Of course this harkens back to Freud (as does much else so it would seem) and his over-used Oedipus Complex, specifically its' castration anxiety phase. But inclusion in this particular argument fits like a puzzle piece. The gist of this conceptual byproduct is that when little boys are first exposed to female genitalia prior to puberty (though some might take exception to early parenting that includes such detail) the first question the kids has is "Gee, where's her thingy?" This, naturally enough -- in addition to all the other bizarre sexual themes going through the poor brat's head -- leads to each kid fearing for his own thingy which, according to Freud at any rate, results in the testosterone infused male persona and the penis as a weapon of both offense (so to speak) and defense; a weapon dripping with sex and womb-love and a sort of animal drive nobody really seems in the mood to admit. Thus remove the weapon, remove the persona.
Soldini's actions had nothing to do with political removal other than the eradication of as many women as possible using the metaphorical weapon the gender had refused to accept, to even want. The killings were sexual in the worst of ways... and that essential, if rudely aggressive, eroticism is at the core of my argument. The brackets, Poplawski and Von Brunn, are essentially the offense/defense mode in action, metaphor as reality -- Poplawski in defense of "soul" (penis), his spiritual compatriot Von Brunn the other side of the coin -- offense as prevention.
Using this indicator it's easy to see how genitalia forms, warps and justifies attitudes and behavior in males of the species. It's much the same with size. Let's face it; there's a reason for the oversized tires on that pick-up that just drove by -- and it isn't traction, either. But at least it provides some compensation, so to speak. Outright confiscation carries no such faux reprieves. Loss equals feminization (no thingy), the awful realization that, disempowered, wingers might end up noshing on brie and up-market crackers at a gallery opening themselves someday.
Nonetheless, buried somewhere in this decidedly amateur psychoanalysis lies the deeper meaning of "castration anxiety" and its societal "extensions". That of course is fear -- fear of everything un-American (unfamiliar) and confusion over new influences that beg answers the christian right-wing mindset just can't ever provide. Of course these guys long to return to the womb. Who the hell wouldn't given that particular frame of reference?
Yes, it's fear that ignites the 9/12ers as individuals. Not that this suggests some kind of Ayn Rand in overalls objectivism. Rather that abject individual fear, the emotionalism that longs for short-term answers to long-term problems, the eroticism of the now, propels the "reasoning" behind each and every tea-bagged sap extent thus promoting a collectivization the group as a whole. It's all about as intellectual as mud.
Everything -- harkening back to Freud again -- has a sexual base; religion, culture, politics, going to the grocery store to buy some eggs (okay, so I'm kinda stretching it on that one) -- all of it can easily be interpreted through such a lens. The fact that the men -- Soldini as core -- chose to exercise their lower instincts says as much about the whole right wing movement as it does the individuals (Powlaski, Van Brunn) themselves, a movement that targets incipient psychos and twists them until they break for its' own nefarious purposes. The result? Guns at tea parties, hell, the tea parties themselves -- bussed-in angry white guys willing to howl and snort like wolves because wifey won't give them a... Get the idea?
As long as there's violence there will be politics, a mediator shifting from left to right and back again. But as far as the mediation part? We may have passed that point by now. Instead it's become a battle for supremacy between groups of largely white males, a kind of "Whose got the biggest thingy?" everybody else gets to play -- whether they like it not. In such an environment everything is bound to get personal. Liberals growl and maybe have bad thoughts when it gets too close to the bone. But when it gets too personal on the right?
Bang-bang. You're dead.
Tom Aiken is a writer based in Austin, Texas
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
