Are ladies by their nature instinctively better shooters?

[mcb]

Does the results of major competitions have any bearing on this discussion? Women rarely win national matches in USPSA, IDPA, 3-gun, Steel Challenge, PRC, etc matches. How much of that is skill and how much of that is simply the fact the most of those sports are male dominated in participation?

 

[Kleanbore]

... Rob Pincus ... pointed out that women are less likely to be shooters or into firearms in general. A woman who wants to learn will listen better, most of the time. The same when training military recruits how to shoot. A recruit who grew up around firearms their whole life may have bad habits that need to be corrected in order to shoot better, to military standard. Instructors usually have an easier time training a student with no firearm experience.

Rob Pincus knows more about cognitive processes, teaching, learning, and training than just about anyone I know. I'll accept what he says.

There's another factor. Years ago, there was an article in The American Rifleman about the men's and women's small-bore rifle teams at the University of Wisconsin. The women consistently outscored the men--every year.

The coach said that while the men used muscle strength to handle the heavy-barrel rifles, the women let gravity work for them and let the guns balance themselves, thus minimizing muscle tremors

Wether one might characterize that as having anything to do with "instinct", I don't know.

 

[Ernie Bass]

Rob Pincus knows more about cognitive processes, teaching, learning, and training than just about anyone I know. I'll accept what he says.

There's another factor. Years ago, there was an article in The American Rifleman about the men's and women's small-bore rifle teams at the University of Wisconsin. The women consistently outscored the men--every year.

The coach said that while the men used muscle strength to handle the heavy-barrel rifles, the women let gravity work for them and let the guns balance themselves, thus minimizing muscle tremors

Wether one might characterize that as having anything to do with "instinct", I don't know.

herrwalther said: ↑

... Rob Pincus ... pointed out that women are less likely to be shooters or into firearms in general. A woman who wants to learn will listen better, most of the time. The same when training military recruits how to shoot. A recruit who grew up around firearms their whole life may have bad habits that need to be corrected in order to shoot better, to military standard. Instructors usually have an easier time training a student with no firearm experience.

I agree with herrwalther. And the same would go for coaching Runners over the years as I mentioned. But a I will disagree to some extinct. A man or woman with the same background will, if competitive have a thirst for learning and instruction. Take them equally with prior competition, it can go either way. Does not make a difference because of sex.
I do not coach firearms, but to say men will just use strength to handle a heavy barrel rifle is certainly not what I see a lot of good shooters male or female do. I certainly use gravity to work for me. Not just something I learned in shooting, but in all aspects of different tools etc. I think that statement that all men do this, is a opinion only. I believe Mr. Pincus may have been talking about New shooters, which he might be right. Maybe women depending on size and muscular strength or lack of are forced to use leverage which would be a natural instinct. I would guess a male with lack of strength would most likey do the same.

 

[Kleanbore]

Take them equally with prior competition, it can go either way

On the small-bore fible teams atthe University of Wisconsin, the women out-scored the men.

to say men will just use strength to handle a heavy barrel rifle is certainly not what I

Where did "just" come from?

I think that statement that all men do this,

Who said "all"?

is a opinion only.

It was the observation-based opinion of a coach of championship rifle teams.

 

[1KPerDay]

Years ago, there was an article in The American Rifleman about the men's and women's small-bore rifle teams at the University of Wisconsin. The women consistently outscored the men--every year.

The coach said that while the men used muscle strength to handle the heavy-barrel rifles, the women let gravity work for them and let the guns balance themselves, thus minimizing muscle tremors

Wether one might characterize that as having anything to do with "instinct", I don't know.

Very interesting. This is one example where there's empirical data, male vs female, with identical equipment and scoring where we may actually see meaningful results. "Better shooters" is very subjective, and is strongly influenced by the observer's bias in many cases. In my own case, I may be somewhat "sexist" in my estimation of success. What I mean is, I appreciate women getting into shooting sports and I might be unconsciously ascribing more skill or better attentiveness to a woman than I would to a man, even though if observed objectively or measured analytically, the two may be performing exactly the same, or the female actually more poorly. I'm sure this happens frequently because males who want to get others involved in activities that they themselves enjoy might be "extra-encouraging" to women and make an extra effort to make them feel welcome, safe, and successful.

Anyone know about trap/skeet shooting? Do women compete against men in the worlds or are teams segregated by sex? I know that one skeet shooter lady has won medals in more olympics than anyone IIRC.

Is competitive benchrest shooting a male-dominated sport? Again, we come up to the issue @mcb pointed out that the domination of males in certain disciplines may simply be due to population. I personally have never seen a female shooter place in the top 5 in any practical shooting competition, but again, there may be 5 or 8 lady shooters out of 100 competitors, so the fact that they don't place well in my local club is not a meaningful data point statistically.

 

[Rockrivr1]

When I taught my wife to shoot she picked it up very quick. At 10 yards she was able to hit the X several times in a row using my Ruger 22/45 within her first hour of shooting. She loved it so much that somehow it's now become her 22/45.......

 

[Kleanbore]

"Better shooters" is very subjective, and is strongly influenced by the observer's bias in many cases.

In small-bore rifle competition?

 

[wiscoaster]

"Better shooters" is very subjective, and is strongly influenced by the observer's bias in many cases.

Ummm ... I don't know how holes in a paper target could be gender-biased.

 

[1KPerDay]

In small-bore rifle competition?

No, please read my post again.

 

[1KPerDay]

Ummm ... I don't know how holes in a paper target could be gender-biased.

Please read my post again. I’m saying that smallbore rifle competition scores is one of the few cases mentioned where the data might actually be meaningful. The OP asked about “better shooters” and lots of the replies have been completely subjective estimations, including mine. Having male and female teams shooting using the same equipment and same targets is one case where the results actually may demonstrate superiority of one sex over another.

 

[entropy]

This is purely anecdotal, but a good recent example; SWMBO wanted to learn how to shoot some of my guns to be able to defend herself when I'm not home. It took rioters in Mpls. threatening to 'bring it to the 'burbs' to get her to consider this, and their vow to march east down I-94. The Hudson PD and the WI State Patrol put the kibosh on their plan by putting a rather impenetrable wall at the Hudson bridge which fortunately they did not have to activate.
So we went to the range, and started at the pistol range, I brought 3 pistols and my AR. I showed her how each worked, and demonstrated grip and stance, and she determined she really didn't like any of the pistols, but the 1911 was the one she disliked the least. And she shot it well enough to get the job done. We went up to the rifle range. I did the same routine with my AR pistol, showed her the controls, tried to show her stance (as the photo shows she didn't take to that as well) and let her shoot. This is the result: (Bear in mind she hates long guns, thanks to her brothers handing her a .410 and not teaching her how to use it)



Some of you recognize the target. This is at 25 yards. For someone who hasn't shot an AR before, I'd say she did alright. I feel better knowing she can defend herself now.

Anyone know about trap/skeet shooting? Do women compete against men in the worlds or are teams segregated by sex? I know that one skeet shooter lady has won medals in more olympics than anyone IIRC.

That would be Kim Rhode.

As for Trap, They can compete either way. Shooters are classified by known ability, from AAA (top) to D class. There are age categories also, as well as a female class with two age categories.
the Age categories are Sub-junior, (14 and under) Junior (15-18) Junior Gold (18-23, was introduced as Collegiate) Sub Vet (55-65) Vet (65-70) Sr. Vet (70 plus) The Vet classes are age defined, not indicating military veteran.
The women's classes are Lady I and Lady II, determined by age, not sure what the age cutoffs are.

A good for instance; An 18 year old girl goes to a shoot; She can enter as a Junior, or Lady I . She has to declare which at time of entry. Her classification, say AA, determines the yardage she shoots Handicap at. She might elect to shoot Junior, but there is tough competition in that class, because she will be shooting against not only all the excellent female high school shooters. (there are many, coached a few of them myself) but all the boys, too. So, she might decide to shoot Lady I, there is usually less competition there at AA, though that is becoming less true, as there are young ladies who continue shooting past high school and college, something rare in the past.

 

[wiscoaster]

Please read my post again...<snip>... The OP asked about “better shooters” ...<snip>

Please read the OP again. I'm the OP poster, and the example given was definitely not subjective. I noted the condition of the target BEFORE I knew who the target belonged to. It had been hung next to mine and I got down to the berm to swap out mine before she got there. There was no gender bias in my evaluation of the target's condition. And this example is only one instance of multiple such observations.

 

[1KPerDay]

Please read the OP again. I'm the OP poster, and the example given was definitely not subjective. I noted the condition of the target BEFORE I knew who the target belonged to. It had been hung next to mine and I got down to the berm to swap out mine before she got there. There was no gender bias in my evaluation of the target's condition. And this example is only one instance of multiple such observations.

Kay

 

[Crazy Horse]

OK, I bow to consensus: 1) It was a poorly worded question. 2) Women are not instinctively or by nature better shooters. But my opinion, which is based on my personal observation, is that all other things being equal - background, age, intelligence, training, experience, firearm used, physical abilities, etc, etc - remains unchanged: a female shoots better than a male. I guess the thing that you've all convinced me of is: I have no explanation for why that's what I've observed and reached that opinion. Perhaps it's something I haven't observed, or something I don't understand. I'm guessing it's because my opinion is based on observation of a very small self-selected subset of the overall group, whereby a generalization of the entire group is not appropriate. Thanks for all your comments.

You need to get out to the range more ;-)

 

[1KPerDay]

Please read the OP again. I'm the OP poster, and the example given was definitely not subjective.

Actually it definitely WAS subjective. You noted one shooter shooting well IN YOUR ESTIMATION. You don't have an empirically valid data point by looking at an "obviously new shooter" sighting in her AR and keeping all her shots within a 10 inch circle. This is not uncommon but when someone points out that your observation is biased, you should examine the data and facts and your own feelings about it and see where your data can be improved.

If you had 10 new male shooters and 10 new female shooters, all shooting the same gun and ammo and targets on the same day, you MIGHT have something that starts to look statistically valid, if you could demonstrate that the female shooters shot statistically smaller groups.

One observation of one shooter doing what you consider well, and saying "multiple such observations" is not statistically valid and IMO displays your bias.

The smallbore rifle team Kleanbore mentioned is one example where we might see a clear statistical difference in shooting ability between sexes.

 

[Crazy Horse]

When I taught my wife to shoot she picked it up very quick. At 10 yards she was able to hit the X several times in a row using my Ruger 22/45 within her first hour of shooting. She loved it so much that somehow it's now become her 22/45.......

I'm hoping to have a similar experience with my wife. Just got a Keltec P17. Great shooter, light, and of course it's a 22 so recoil is very very light. Fingers crossed. If not, oh well, the hunt continues....... Not going to complain too much as the hunt keeps me engaged in the thrill of the chase.

 

[Ernie Bass]

I use to shoot 10 meter Air Rifles competition so looked this up first.

Rules introduced in 2018 ended the competition format differences between male and female athletes. Also, the final was changed to 24 shots (5 shots + 5 shots + 14 shots elimination phase). In the final, the highest achievable final score is 261.6 points. Up to 2020, no top competitor has achieved an official perfect final score under these rules. The current world record is 252.8 for men and 252.9 for women.

The pic is world championships for Prone shooting. I really see no desire to pick women over men or vice versa in the sport of shooting Obviously some think it is.

For those that just want a winning score vs men and women shooters, maybe this will make you feel good.

I say Bravo to both men and women.
50 metre rifle prone (formerly known as one of four free rifle disciplines) is an International Shooting Sport Federation event consisting of 60 shots from the prone position with a .22 Long Rifle (5.6 mm) caliber rifle. The time limit is 75 minutes for the entire match, including sighting shots, or 90 minutes if there is a need to compensate for slow scoring systems. In the 2013 ISSF rules the 60-shot prone match consists of 15-minute preparation and sighting time, followed by the match - 60 shots in 50 minutes for electronic scoring, and 60 shots in 60 minutes for paper targets.[1]

The sport is based on the traditional "English Match" that also consisted of 60 shots in the prone position with a .22 rifle, but had varying distances between 45.7 metres (50.0 yd) and 100 metres (110 yd).

 

[wiscoaster]

Actually it definitely WAS subjective.

I'm sorry, I still disagree. The implication I gathered from your post is that my observation was subjective due to the shooter's gender, which definitely cannot be the case, because I didn't know what the shooter's gender was at the time of observation. I never meant to imply my observations were statistically valid; I do know a little more about statistics than to say that. You're forgetting it's an opinion poll. Opinions rarely are influenced by mere statistics.

 

[Meeks36]

I don't know if they are instinctively better, but they are easier to train. They take instruction a lot better than the male of the species. After teaching two daughters and a wife to shoot I can truthfully state that they were a lot more attentive than the young men that I have taught. I really think that it is the macho syndrome in the males. They have watched the crap in the movies and on tv and think that they know it all.rl.

I see you haven't met my daughter. Shes a beautiful redhead that I have been trying to teach to shoot for years. Shes 10 now been using mt bb gun for 2.5 years. Refuses to listen. Cant hit squat. My son is decent. Thinking about taking her to a class. Maybe someone else can get her to listen. I doubt it though from the phone calls I get from her school. I hope she will learn. A restraining order is just a piece of paper. A 9mm says um not a victim. More so then a piece of paper.

 

[hdbiker]

We had a gal in our shooting team that was of short heavy stature. She one of our best shooters. hdbiker

 

[1KPerDay]

I'm sorry, I still disagree. The implication I gathered from your post is that my observation was subjective due to the shooter's gender, which definitely cannot be the case, because I didn't know what the shooter's gender was at the time of observation.

The point is your observation was not sufficient to determine "good" or "better" or "bad" regardless of whether the shooter was male or female. You say you are familiar with statistics; then you should know that seeing one group of one shooter on one day and saying "that's good" doesn't mean anything. Good compared to what? Compared to multiple other observations of unique single events as you say? There's no way that isn't a subjective observation. Then you start throwing "opinion" around. In my OPINION your single observation was SUBJECTIVE and your assertion that female shooters are "instinctively better" is biased and your data points are fundamentally flawed. If we really want to answer the question in a meaningful way we need to apply the scientific method, which Kleanbore's example begins to do. That's all.

 

[wiscoaster]

...<snip>... Then you start throwing "opinion" around. ...<snip>...

No ... I repeat ... read my OP. The question is definitely "what's your opinion?" That was clearly stated in the very first post. Nothing statistically or objectively or even meaningful was implied. It was pretty much to just have a fun discussion. Not to settle any question.

 

[1KPerDay]

Don't see why you're getting your back up. You were begging for replies and votes, and several people have pointed out how your question is flawed. I'm interested in the subject and would like to see statistically valid data demonstrating one way or another. But don't try to tell me your single observation of a single target isn't SUBJECTIVE. Because it is. Have a nice day.

 

[film495]

ha ha - no, but I don't know they are better or worse. The notion that women are better listeners is a crock, have you met many women? They wait to speak as a gender, and most love running their mouths more than anything in the world. Yes, that is sexist I guess, but nearly 50 years of observation at home and work proves it again and again - so - it is just my observation.

 

[wiscoaster]

Maybe I should post another opinion poll: "Is wiscoaster guilty of gender bias?"


(I'm sure the results would be YES=100% and NO=0% --- statistically valid with 10E30 obserevations --- WHEN GENDER IS KNOWN AS AN OBSERVATION NONVARIABLE)