Do shootresses really learn faster than shooters?


PDA






Boberama
September 25, 2010, 03:29 AM
In a book by Ayoob, he says new shootresses are usually faster than new shooters at learning to shoot.

Is this true?

And why?

If you enjoyed reading about "Do shootresses really learn faster than shooters?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Full Metal Jacket
September 25, 2010, 03:41 AM
yes.

i take dates to the range, and these chicks generally shoot MUCH better than guys their first time out.

it's been proven that woman have better hand/eye coordination than men. that's the reason.

9mmepiphany
September 25, 2010, 03:46 AM
Generally yes

Women have fewer perceived ideas of how to shoot and have less investing in being right, than in learning how it should be done.

It is more a communication style, than a gender ability...it is the same reason most men won't stop to ask directions when they are lost. If you had a male who will admit that they have no idea of how to shoot and that you are obviously the more knowledgeable shooter, they learn just as quickly...they have nothing to prove.

Boberama
September 25, 2010, 03:55 AM
So that's probably why a lawyeress I know said that when she was shown the police practice range here, she shot better than them on her first try.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------^That's scary.

Full Metal Jacket
September 25, 2010, 05:15 AM
:eek:

Boberama
September 25, 2010, 06:52 AM
人生哲理 means Philosophy of Life.

The second quote is from NASA's blog.


Bet you guys still haven't solved my puzzle.

btg3
September 25, 2010, 07:35 AM
2 reasons:

FIRST: slightly better hand-eye coordination

SECOND: The gals LISTEN and are far more "coach-able" that the fellas who think they already know how and can't wait to show ya.

Flintknapper
September 25, 2010, 07:43 AM
9mmepiphany wrote:


Generally yes

Women have fewer perceived ideas of how to shoot and have less investing in being right, than in learning how it should be done.

It is more a communication style, than a gender ability...it is the same reason most men won't stop to ask directions when they are lost. If you had a male who will admit that they have no idea of how to shoot and that you are obviously the more knowledgeable shooter, they learn just as quickly...they have nothing to prove.

I would agree with all of the above.

I have trained hundreds of people to shoot, from rank beginners to fairly accomplished shooters (rifle and pistol).

On average....women/females, tend to learn the basics quicker than their male counterparts. I would attribute that success to their willingness to listen and learn. Generally, they come with a more "teachable spirit" than do the men/males.

But....there are other factors as well.

"Most" females possess marginally better hand/eye coordination and measurably better fine motor skills.

Females process information differently than males, they use both sides of the brain to a greater degree and communicate more freely.

All these things are conducive to quick learning....whereas males (not all) seem to have "built in" impediments. I can't tell you the number of men (males over the age of 16) that simply refused to accept sound instruction.

It seems that a good number of them ...come down the birth canal...thinking they ALREADY know how to: Rope, Ride, Shoot, Spit and Cuss.

KarenTOC
September 25, 2010, 08:01 AM
There's an author/linguist/professor called Deborah Tannen who has studied male vs female communication styles. She explains that there's a big difference in the way boys and girls learn how to get along with members of their own sex: little boys bond through competition; little girls bond through cooperation. It's important for boys to "win" because they are competing for status and "power." (My loudenbanger is better than your wimpencheapie). Women are the opposite - they prefer to share the power. Each girl/woman in a group will try to build up the others rather than compete with them (oh no, your shoes are much prettier than mine!).

Men compete with their trainer; women cooperate. Obviously there are exceptions.


By the way: women who shoot are called shooters. Women who practice law are called lawyers. What's with all the esses added to words?!?

hso
September 25, 2010, 08:15 AM
In my experience of training people to shoot, yes. Fewer bad habits to overcome, less "I know this already", more active interest in listening/learning. That doesn't mean that all men or all women are the same, it's just, percentage based, that a much much higher percentage of women are more receptive to training starting out and that a much higher percentage of men aren't.

LHRGunslinger
September 25, 2010, 08:25 AM
I'm 21. I earned Rifle Shooting Merit Badge in the good ol BSA. That means at 25 feet with a Marlin .22LR Bolt gun with iron sights I had to get five groups of five touching a quarter and five groups of five under. I don't know a damn thing about shooting only that I got lucky.

JoeSlomo
September 25, 2010, 08:51 AM
Do shootresses really learn faster than shooters?

No.

Individuals with no prior experience with firearms may seem like they "learn faster" when coached by a competent instructor, however, this has more to do with NOT having to unlearn bad habits than gender. Males tend to have experience with some semblance of a firearm, real or otherwise, and often times must UNLEARN before they can learn.

"Most" females possess marginally better hand/eye coordination and measurably better fine motor skills.

My experience shooting professionally and in competition has been counter to this statement.

Female performance with firearms has always been on the lower end of the spectrum compared to males I served with in the military. The same applies to local USPSA and IDPA matches. I don't believe a female has yet achieved a "Grand Master" classification in USPSA (the top 5%) and only a handful have achieved a "Master" classification (from 85% to 94.9%). USPSA is a sport dominated by the need for excellent hand/eye coordination and fine motor skills, and yet the stats show that being female lends no advantage to performance.

In the end it comes down to a willingness to learn, and having the discipline to execute what you have learned.

cambeul41
September 25, 2010, 09:01 AM
There's an author/linguist/professor called Deborah Tannen who has studied male vs female communication styles.

And an amazing number of men think they know more about the subject than does Tannen.

Legionnaire
September 25, 2010, 09:15 AM
In my experience with newbies and students in hunter safety classes, yes. Probably the primary reason is that the girls don't have bad habits, and they tend to be more willing to listen to instruction. I am not saying that "women shoot better than men." Only that female newbies tend (a tendency is not a rule) to do better than males.

sniper5
September 25, 2010, 09:24 AM
Yes, for all the reasons stated.

76shuvlinoff
September 25, 2010, 09:29 AM
Yes....... unless she has an extremely competitive edge and an abundance of pride...

I know, I married that girl 23 years ago.

hardluk1
September 25, 2010, 11:01 AM
There is also no macho attitude envolved with lady's. That also go's with.learning to ride motorcycles.

DFW1911
September 25, 2010, 11:48 AM
In my experience: yes, without question. I have no idea how many folks I've taught to shoot (quite a few) and without a doubt the ladies typically learn proper techniques and get better results faster than men.

Just my $.02. YMMV.

Take care,
DFW1911

buck460XVR
September 25, 2010, 12:09 PM
From my experience, females do LEARN faster than males when it comes to shooting sports, but very seldom over time, do they become more PROFICIENT.

Is it biology or culture?:confused:

Don't know, don't care.:p

Red Cent
September 25, 2010, 01:02 PM
"Women have fewer perceived ideas of how to shoot and have less investing in being right, than in learning how it should be done."

Well said.
It seems as if they do reach a plateau. Randi Rogers aka Holy Terror has ruled the World Cowboy Championship. She is so good, she places in the top 16 and earns the right to the shoot off for Top Gun. I can't remember her winning that one. She gaduated college, married, and Is working/shooting for Glock. She came in, by a gnat's butt, second in the female world this year.

Jesse Abbate shoots for Glock. She used to shoot cowboy and married Billy Abbate aka The Grim Reaper.
In six years or so, Jessie has gone from a beginning shooter to top ranked professional, earning National and World Champion shooting titles, as well as other regional champion titles, in four different shooting disciplines. She joined Team Glock and became a representative to the shooting industry. Jessie trains with Billy, one of the first competitors in the nation to earn the Grand Master classification.
A little early to tell, but judging by the way she is winning, Dave Sevigny better watch out. She shoots for Glock also.
http://www.jessieabbate.com/accomplishments.php
Maybe Jesse will topple the man thiing.

M2 Carbine
September 25, 2010, 01:05 PM
In my limited experience teaching both it seems like females do learn faster.

A good example is this girl that I taught a few months ago.
She had never touched a gun in her life (her mother is anti gun).

In about an hour she went from standing shooting a Ruger 22/45 (about 50 rounds) to shooting a S&W 38 J Frame on the move, while getting most shots COM, or close.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v135/Bell406_206B/Lindsey.jpg

Then as it got dark I gave her a Crimson Trace laser equipped J Frame and a quick briefing on using the laser. As I packed up she tore the targets up with the laser.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v135/Bell406_206B/Lindseyshootinglaser.jpg

On her second shooting day she was shooting very accurately, left handed, with the J Frame.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v135/Bell406_206B/Lindseyandnatilyshootinglefthanded.jpg

Then I gave her a briefing on my 4 inch 45 Kimber and 4-5 magazines and told her to shoot it at about 10 yards and see how she like it. She did good.
After shooting the 40 rounds I ran her through the Texas concealed carry qualification course, just for fun. (50 timed shots from 3, 7 and 15 yards)
She shot a 242/250. Which is a decent score for someone that's been shooting a while and great for someone on their second day shooting.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v135/Bell406_206B/LindseyshootingCHL.jpg

I like to teach females to shoot.:)

W.E.G.
September 25, 2010, 01:28 PM
Will my scores go up if I put on a dress?

I don't want y'all standing behind me while I shoot prone now.

Jbmoney21
September 25, 2010, 01:30 PM
Yes, cause they will actually listen to what you teach them.

52grain
September 25, 2010, 01:57 PM
I would have to say that they do learn faster. Mostly because they are more coachable.

I am having trouble correcting Mrs. Klineia's flinch when shooting trap, but other than that, she was a pretty quick study. She always closes her eyes right before she pulls the trigger. She knows she's not supposed to do it, just can't stop herself. I use the 12 gauge Winlites. Only solution that I can think of is to trade her 870 for a 28 gauge.

She's pretty decent with a rifle.

springmom
September 25, 2010, 02:12 PM
Wait a minute. Did Mas actually use the word "shootresses"????????? :barf::banghead:

Jan

Manco
September 25, 2010, 02:14 PM
Mainly what needs to change is how both men and women far too often view women & shooting, and all the related stereotypes. After reading this thread, however, it seems that once we've gotten past that, we then have to learn how to stop discriminating against men, too. :rolleyes: Fairness to individuals is not a pendulum based on gender, race, or whatever.

Dnaltrop
September 25, 2010, 02:31 PM
My wife, (who grew up in deep NE Portland during some of the worst of the '80s) used to startle violently at the sound of gunshots, fireworks, etc. While not Anti, she had spent most of her life developing a very healthy fear.

She was ok with my guns as long as I didnt fiddle with them when we started dating.

She eventually was ok Sitting in the car Reading whilst I wreaked terrible destruction upon soda cans in the woods.

10 years into it, I got her to pick up a .22 rifle, which she instantly hated from having something on her shoulder, but I forced her to at least try the Model 10.

She emptied the model 10, paused... then had me reload over and over for her. shooting a 6" grouping at 10 yards consistently dead center, and making it look easy.

took 5 more years but she's got her own Sigma love affair going now.

labhound
September 25, 2010, 02:47 PM
My wife shoots slower and has a steadier trigger pull than I do and as a result gets better accuracy. I have to really concentrate on the basics to equal or pass her (mostly equaling, not much passing :eek:)!

Sky
September 25, 2010, 02:56 PM
OK that does it!!!!! I am gonna fire my entire squad of hairy legged Zombie Killers and get me some female shooters!! Volunteers???

9mmepiphany
September 25, 2010, 04:07 PM
Wait a minute. Did Mas actually use the word "shootresses"?????????

It isn't that uncommon a word, is it?

It is from the same age as the word hostess and saves the use of two words female and shooters when one will suffice :)

Shadow 7D
September 25, 2010, 04:38 PM
It's a learning/willingness to learn.

My DS said in basic, it you are a country boy who grew up with gun and pick a gnat off a bulls butt at 300M, you show me and I'll let you sleep for the next 3 days, if you don't know jack, I'll teach you how to pick a gnat off at 300M.

For the rest of you who THINK you can shoot, this is going to be a long and painful week.

If you think you know it all, then you don't have/ are able to learn.

oldfool
September 25, 2010, 04:52 PM
well, call it whatever you want, but yeah, girl people do it better
and I never had even one of 'em ever say to me, "here, hold my beer and watch this !"
(which might have a little to do with it)

PS
but forget trying on dresses fellas, never helped me a bit :D
(and I ain't shaving my legs, either, not even if it helped me swim faster)

Freedom_fighter_in_IL
September 25, 2010, 05:10 PM
"Women have fewer perceived ideas of how to shoot and have less investing in being right,

Uhhhhh Whoever said this has never lived with a woman. At least not a southern woman. I have yet to ever meet one that did not have to always be "right".

That being said, women do have a better ability to learn new things because they are, quite simply, smarter than males. They are easier to teach because they do not have the pre-conceived notion that they already know it. And it is a proven fact that females do in fact have better dexterity than males on average.

M2 Carbine
September 25, 2010, 05:13 PM
What's fun is teaching a wife or girlfriend of someone how to shoot and in a day or two she out-shoots the man that's been shooting for a good while.:D



Many years ago a man I worked with (Policemen) and I were shooting a little on weekends at a gravel pit.
One weekend our girlfriends were going with us and I was going to teach the friend's girl to shoot.
I told my buddy (he had a little bit of an Ego), "Now don't get upset when my girlfriend out-shoots you".
His answer was, "Ain't no girl out-shooting me".
I said, "I can out-shoot you, right?"
He said, "Well, Yes"
I said, "Well, I taught her to shoot and on her good days she can out-shoot me".

Through the day I taught the girl to shoot and she was a quick learner.

At the end of the day we usually had some kind of shooting match.
That my girlfriend out-shot him didn't bother my buddy too much, but his girlfriend out-shooting him got him a little upset.:D

9mmepiphany
September 25, 2010, 05:18 PM
Uhhhhh Whoever said this has never lived with a woman

OK, I'll bite. How is what I wrote:

Women have fewer perceived ideas of how to shoot and have less investing in being right,

different, in meaning, then what you wrote:

They are easier to teach because they do not have the pre-conceived notion that they already know it.

Freedom_fighter_in_IL
September 25, 2010, 05:33 PM
Women are ALWAYS right!!! There is a huge difference between knowing that they are right and knowing that they do not know how to do something. I know it is a hard logic to follow. After 22 years of living with one I still can not always follow it myself :(

9mmepiphany
September 25, 2010, 05:57 PM
You're right, it must be a southern belle thing

Old krow
September 25, 2010, 07:02 PM
What's fun is teaching a wife or girlfriend of someone how to shoot and in a day or two she out-shoots the man that's been shooting for a good while

The first day at our range with my girlfriend, after about 10 minutes of coaching she outshot me with my own gun. I am admittedly not a great pistol shot though. After 45 minutes I gave her the gun and told her to keep it because someone broke into our house we'd be better off with her at the trigger.

I work very hard to remain even somewhat accurate on pistols and she's hitting clay pigeons (stationary of course) at 40 yards with a Glock 19 on her third trip to the range. The last time that we shot we were both hitting the clay pigeons at 40 yards, but I have to work harder to do it.

longhair75
September 25, 2010, 07:33 PM
My wife hit a quarter at fifty feet with her BHP one night at the range.

jaholder1971
September 25, 2010, 07:37 PM
Will my scores go up if I put on a dress?


Maybe at a pride march, on the range not so much...

hso
September 25, 2010, 07:43 PM
"shootress" is an uncommon word in any era after 1880.

BTW, I'm in TN and the women I train are almost always better at learning to shoot than the men I train. Of course, they're coming to learn to shoot instead of having someone force them to so they're open minded, receptive to doing something new and different, and motivated. They've also been from all over the US and the world (Oak Ridge draws people from all over the planet).

hardluk1
September 25, 2010, 07:45 PM
And the Lady's muti-task better than any of us. Boy if the women in our lives read this tread they would just glow. Be so proud of us being so inferior in so many ways.

Sky
September 25, 2010, 07:52 PM
Not inferior just different. Used to tell my wife to read something and give me a briefing...Pictures are for men, words are for women....hahaheheheh Joke or should I just hang myself!

Cap'n Jack Burntbeard
September 25, 2010, 08:14 PM
Any women who I have introduced to shooting, have adapted rather quickly and do quite well.

Manco
September 25, 2010, 08:27 PM
That being said, women do have a better ability to learn new things because they are, quite simply, smarter than males.

Hogwash! :rolleyes: Some men are smarter than most women, and some women are smarter than most men. Although there are some general gender-related differences in how our brains function, overall intelligence is not related to gender. If women are truly smarter than men on the average in the context of shooting, then I guess it only applies to male gun enthusiasts, and little I've read in this thread so far proves otherwise. :p Either that or you're all whipped! :neener:

labhound
September 25, 2010, 08:56 PM
Manco, don't know if we're all "whipped" or not, but remember, there's two types of husbands...henpecked and liars! :D

TexasGunbie
September 25, 2010, 09:01 PM
It depends on the chick. My ex been to the shooting range about 4 times and rarely hits the target.
But I had a friend that went the first time and pretty much mastered the firearm.
Then I had another girl that went with me and she pointed the gun to everyone and got people very angry. (I did explain the safety rules to her many times too).

So it depends on the person.

mustang_steve
September 25, 2010, 10:02 PM
Absolutely.

Women in general are better listeners than we men are.

I work in a line of work that requires extreme attention to words, as well as instructing others over the phone. I find the men in general require more detailed insteruction than women. Women will do exactly what you ask them to do, while men will in general do the "cliff's notes" of what you told them to do, unless you stress the details. Even with the extreme attention my job requires, I find myself summarizing things regularly as it's how I do everything.

I suspect it's this greater attention to words that make women in general faster learners. I do see some people who are not used to recoil having issues if they started out with a firearm with significant muzzle flip, however that's a realtively small group.

springmom
September 25, 2010, 10:12 PM
"shootress" is an uncommon word in any era after 1880.


Right. And I'm sorry, there is no such word as "lawyeress". :rolleyes: Women really don't need the suffix. It's not in use in print or in conversation.

No huge deal, but it sort of makes us seem like we're something unusual, and we're really not. I see LOTS of women at the range here, from young women there with a date or a dad, to a VERY old lady there the other day, with the owner of the range teaching her to shoot a deer rifle. THAT was cool. :D

We're just shooters. Period. :p

Jan

Beetle Bailey
September 25, 2010, 10:14 PM
I once read that a profession driving instructor (teaches driving on a racetrack) talked about something similiar and made this statement:

There are two things a man doesn't like to be told how to do by another man:

1. Make love to a woman
2. Drive a car

I think in the example here "Drive a car" can be substituted with "Shoot a gun." I am not a certified instructor or anything, but I've given tips to a couple dozen people over the years. It's not that men are stupid, it's just that as the coach, you have to find a way to say things to them that will get them to respond to your coaching. I've had males that listened well and caught on quick and I've had males that seem to unconciously resist what I say, and everything in between.

The three adult women and two girls I've coached all did great and it was a lot easier to get them to follow exactly what I asked. I taught a woman how to shoot just last weekend (she's shot handguns a total of six times and also had a little bit of backyard experience with a BB gun). Started her off with a CZ 452 with iron sights and then a scoped Marlin 795. She did great at 50 yards so we went to my AR15 National Match. She shot a five shot group on paper at 50 yards and then we went hunting for steel targets. :D

She repeatedly hit the steel pig at 200 yards rather easily so I adjusted the sights and had her try the same size pig at 300 yards. That was easy as well so again I adjusted the sights and had her go for the 400 yard square. It took a few rounds to settle in but in no time she's hammering away at that one as well. So I said "Do you want to go to 500 yards?" :eek: So once again I adjusted the sights and she nailed a 500 yard square on her second shot! :what: Then she hit it again on the next shot to prove it wasn't a fluke. With iron sights even! (okay they were match sights, but still. . . )

I didn't notice while she was shooting but a small crowd had gathered to watch. Some of the comments were:

"I didn't know it was even possible to hit something that far away with iron sights!"

"500 yards? How do you even see that far? And it's her first time?"

"That was awesome! Is that a National Match rifle?"

I asked if she felt like trying 600 yards, but she said she was having trouble seeing the targets clearly at that distance so my buddy gave her a Remington 700 Police in .308 with a NF 5.5-22 power scope on it. She never missed any of the 600 yard steel and afterwards told me she wishes she had tried the 600 yard targets with the AR15 because better to have tried and failed. . .

Anywho, she did everything I asked her to so we made a lot of progress in a short amount of time but the guys I have taught to shoot do well too, it's just that it usually take a little longer.

ny32182
September 26, 2010, 01:06 AM
If women were naturally better, this would be borne out in competition.

9mmepiphany
September 26, 2010, 01:52 AM
the OP doesn't say women are naturally better, it asked it they were usually faster than new shooters at learning to shoot.

CapnMac
September 26, 2010, 02:08 AM
In all the times I have given females gun instruction, they have gotten better. Whether a first-time tyro, or a novice. If you see something an suggest an improvement, it's taken to heart and converted to memory.

The only times I have run into problems were when disinterest, or physiology got on the way of teaching. (Just hard to teach how to get that elbow in contract with the ribcage with certain builds--especially when I don't have the first clue how to "fix it".) Cross-dominance id also hard to cope with, too.

Other issue is to remember that you are setting an example, one which will be closely examined and compared to others at the range.

lookshigh123
September 26, 2010, 02:13 AM
that's might be true.

Boberama
September 26, 2010, 02:52 AM
You grammar-gestapo are all wrong.

By the way: women who shoot are called shooters. Women who practice law are called lawyers. What's with all the esses added to words?!?
Wait a minute. Did Mas actually use the word "shootresses"?????????
It isn't that uncommon a word, is it?
It is from the same age as the word hostess and saves the use of two words female and shooters when one will suffice
"shootress" is an uncommon word in any era after 1880.
Right. And I'm sorry, there is no such word as "lawyeress". Women really don't need the suffix. It's not in use in print or in conversation.


First off, women who shoot are not called shooters. Women who practice law are not called lawyers.

Secondly, Ayoob did not use the word shootress in his book.

Thirdly, it is an uncommon word, and does save the use of two words.

Fourthly, yes, again, it is uncommon.

But fifthly, there is such a word as lawyeress. Women do need the suffix. I never heard much about the death of Prince Diana.

From The Elements of English Grammar (1894):
Occupations once reserved to men are now thrown open to women. If we wish to mark the female sex of the persons following these occupations, we must either use compounds and say lady-doctor, lady-lawyer, or manufacture inflected forms and say doctress, lawyeress.

Boberama
September 26, 2010, 03:14 AM
From The history of the famous preacher, Friar Gerund de Campazas: otherwise Gerund Zotes (1758):

Whilst he was a writer to the Notary at St. Milan, he had observed in various processes such expressions as these, Mary Gavilan, the fourth witness, being examined, &c. Ann Palomo, the eighth witness, &c. this hurt him infinitely; for, said he within himself, if a man is a witness, a women must necessarily be a witnessess since otherwise, the sexes are confounded, [...] Neither could he suffer that the author of "The Life and Miracles of St. Catherine" should say, Catherine, the subject of our history; seeming to him that Catherine and subject were false concord, since it amounted to the same as to say, Catherine, the man of our history, it being a plain case that men only ought to be called subjects, and women subjectesses. But if he met in a book with such an expression as, She was not a common woman, but a genius and an elegant writer, he totally lost his patience, and said to his scholars, all furious and flaming with wrath, "Intolerable! What is there more to be done, but to take off our beards and breeches and put them upon women! Why should it not be said, She was not a common woman, but a geniusess and an elegant writrix?"

KarenTOC
September 26, 2010, 09:46 AM
If we wish to mark the female sex of the persons following these occupations,

We no longer "wish to mark the female sex." Therefore, a woman who is a lawyer is no longer called a lawyeress.

From The history of the famous preacher, Friar Gerund de Campazas: otherwise Gerund Zotes (1758):

I admit to being old, but my grammar books were somewhat more modern.

buck460XVR
September 26, 2010, 10:17 AM
I thought this thread was about whether females learn to shoot faster than males.

....not about grammar.

....not about feminism.

IMHO.....Those things really have no pertinence here and only distract from the OP.

shockwave
September 26, 2010, 10:20 AM
Thirdly, it is an uncommon word, and does save the use of two words.

The word "shootress" is purely a nonce coinage. This is a troublesome concept to speakers with a rigid mindset, but it should be stressed that every English user is free to play with words and use them in any way desired.

There are no rules and no limits whatsoever to the skilled speaker. A very great many authors and philosophers have made this case repeatedly, to the extent that it is no longer questioned.

Only the very dim, the uneducated (and sometimes the children of elementary school teachers), will protest that you can't put a preposition at the end of a sentence, and similar such Miss Thistlebottomisms (pace Ted Bernstein). So where does this leave "shootress"? Well, it's the kind of thing that Searle or Austin would describe as being "unhappy" or "unfortunate." It's within the realm of the possible, but not in the sphere of idiomatic usage.

On a trip to visit the National Archives, I had occasion to read in person this letter from Annie Oakley (http://www.archives.gov/global-pages/larger-image.html?i=/research/recover/images/brochure/oakley-letter-l.jpg&c=) to President McKinley, in which she offers the services of herself and "fifty lady sharpshooters."

This indicates that, even in traditional speech at the most-formal register, at a time when suffixes like "-tress" and "-trix" were routinely ubiquitous, something along the lines of "female shooter" was the standard, and today "woman shooter" or "female shooter" is still the idiom.

Manco
September 26, 2010, 11:15 AM
If women were naturally better, this would be borne out in competition.

To be fair, there would have to be equal interest in shooting between women and men, and I don't think that there currently is. Certainly if women did better in competition despite having less interest overall, then that would speak volumes, but just because men still dominate does not mean that men are naturally better overall, either. In short, at present we can't tell for sure from high-level competition, but from what I've seen, I think that women would at least be doing better than they're doing now if they, as a group, had more interest in shooting in general.

the OP doesn't say women are naturally better, it asked it they were usually faster than new shooters at learning to shoot.

True, but many posts in this thread seem to say that women are naturally better shooters in addition to being faster learners. While I think it's true that on the average women tend to be more receptive to training in this field as novices, this has a lot more to do with cultural than biological differences, in my opinion. Some men expect to be naturally good at shooting, which usually isn't the case, and at least better than women, which as we've found isn't necessarily true either (based on what I've seen, I'll simply assume that men and women have more or less equal potential until it's proven otherwise), and these are the ones who are more difficult to instruct. In the end it always comes down to the individual, though, regardless of gender.

As for all the statements being made here about how women are inherently smarter and more talented than men, maybe I'm taking all of this too seriously, but is that what fathers and mothers are telling their sons these days? "You're just a boy--don't worry your pretty little head over it." :rolleyes: I know that all of you wouldn't tell your daughters that they're inferior because they're female, and you certainly should not. But what good is all the progress that has been made and is still, out of necessity and because it is right, being made in enabling women to realize their potential if men are unnecessarily and unfairly denigrated in the process? I guess our newborn sons have had it good for thousands of years, and now it's time for them to "pay the piper" and bear the awful burden of sexual discrimination. :scrutiny:

Boberama
September 27, 2010, 03:25 AM
We no longer "wish to mark the female sex."
Oh yeah? What about this:
'A rigid application of the Guardian style guide caused us to say of Carlo Ponti in his obituary, page 34, January 11, that in his early career he was "already a man with a good eye for pretty actors …" This was one of those occasions when the word "actresses" might have been used.'


This isn't relevant to my original post. Anyways, seems my question has been answered. Thanks all!

9mmepiphany
September 27, 2010, 04:09 AM
Well since the OP feels his question was answered, I guess we're done here

If you enjoyed reading about "Do shootresses really learn faster than shooters?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!