Senior government and politics and information systems major

If you stood face to face with a rapist in the middle of the night, what would you prefer to use to defend yourself: a ballpoint pen or a handgun?

About two weeks ago, the Colorado House of Representatives passed a statewide ban on concealed-carry weapons on public college campuses, and the bill is now being considered by the Colorado Senate. In response to questions concerning women and their right to defend themselves, legislators were quick to come up with silly, petty alternatives to prevent a rapist from attacking them.

Representative Joe Salazar claimed that passive resistance is the way to go. While speaking on the House floor, he stated women don’t need guns because “we have call boxes … safe zones … whistles.”

But how safe are you in a “safe zone?” And what’s a rape whistle really going to do if you’re about to be assaulted with no one else in your vicinity?

Colorado State Senator Jessie Ulibarri suggested that during the 2011 Tucson, Ariz., shooting, some people were able to defend themselves using “ballpoint pens” instead of guns. Representative Paul Rosenthal furthered these ridiculous alternative strategies by saying the buddy system and learning “judo” were adequate forms of self-defense.

It seems it’s male politicians who are at the forefront of taking away a woman’s right to own a concealed-carry weapon and telling her to use weaker or silly alternatives.

Not only are politicians suggesting ineffective ways to defend yourself, but several universities have listed ineffective tips to dispel attackers.

For instance, the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs’s public safety department urged students to “tell your attacker that you have a disease or are menstruating.” According to the department, using your bodily fluids is a very effective way to protect yourself: “Vomiting or urinating may also convince the attacker to leave you alone.”

At Oregon State University, the public safety department suggests students take 16 to 20 hours of training in martial arts or street fighting. The state university also claims that you can discourage your attacker by “claiming to be sick or pregnant” and “fainting” or “acting insane.”

I’m sorry, but don’t politicians and universities support female empowerment? I don’t know about you, but I wouldn’t feel empowered to protect myself if I knew menstruation was my only weapon. And urinating may not even stop a sick, deranged rapist from assaulting me — but a bullet would.

As a woman, I feel offended that politicians expect me to use such impractical, hopeless methods to defend myself from someone who wants to take away my dignity. According to many universities, I’m just a young girl who should act insane to prevent rapists from violating me. As many feminists may say, “This is anti-choice.”

From my life experiences, empowerment never came in the form of urinating, menstruating or acting pregnant. It came in the form of shooting a Beretta DT10 for the first time.

Regardless of whether a woman wants to own a concealed-carry weapon on a college campus, politicians and institutions shouldn’t be making the decision for women nor telling them they can just pretend to menstruate and everything will be fine.

The fact is, gun ownership among women is on the rise. A Gallup poll, from 2005 to 2011, showed the proportion of females who had guns in their households rose 10 percent. Today, almost a quarter of American women own guns.

Sooner or later, we need to realize taking guns away from the law-abiding does not prevent criminals from possessing guns. The idea that women should play dumb or stand back when they are about to be raped only perpetuates sexist judgment. By simply telling women to use pathetic, unsuccessful forms of self-defense, we are only weakening the American woman’s mentality when she is faced with her violent, brutal attacker.

Caroline Carlson is a sophomore government and politics and information systems major. She can be reached at caroline.crlsn@gmail.com.