Sandra’s Miscellany

Last night, PBS had a terrific American Experience show about Annie Oakley. I had no idea she grew up in crushing poverty in Ohio, was sent to a poor farm to work (where she was likely at least physically abused, once thrown out into the snow for hours because she fell asleep while darning), and at the age of 15 shot her way out the situation. When she married and went on the road with her sharpshooter husband, Frank Butler, she made a point of creating her own costumes; they performed in variety shows, which featured half-naked performers and bawdy humor, so she created a “look” for herself that somehow exuded elegant femininity and youth. Then she proceeded to shoot the heart out of the Ace of Hearts at 30 paces. She never missed unless she intended to.

One of the things that amazes me about her is that successful melding of the feminine and the traditionally male.

So today I’m wondering if we can call the realm of guns “traditionally male.” I mean, sure, men invented them and it’s mostly men who’ve used them ever since, but the weapon itself seems neutral. Does it care whether the hand that grips it is male or female? Does it respond better to a man’s hand than a woman’s? Probably not.

I love guns. I love holding a Ruger 9mm and the smell of cordite and the buck of the gun. I love how smooth the Smith and Wesson .45 feels when it fires. I love the punchy jump of a SW99, even though it’s hard as heck to rack. Clearly this doesn’t make me less feminine, but it does call into question that whole issue of “manly pursuits.”

Annie Oakley dressed in calf-length skirts, wore Victorian long-sleeved blouses that buttoned up to her neck, and could shoot better than anyone she came up against. More than that, she transformed herself from a ragged, dirt-poor waif into an astute businesswoman doing the thing she loved to do more than anything else in the world.

If she’s not a Bombshell, I’m not sure who is.