"Strong" Girl Names are No Match for Strong Skills

Six girls rely on me every day to help them grow into strong, independent women. So much has been said about exactly what a mother can do to help their daughters achieve that goal.

It starts with their names. Baby name sites like these can help a mother choose just the right "strong" name. Forget "cutesy" names, names with "distinctive" spellings, or nouns like "Joy." Conversely, names that are traditionally male or are a last name are supposedly good choices.

We were very picky about our daughters' names. Avoiding the pitfalls while choosing something distinctive was tricky. We decided against "Molly" and stuck to traditional spellings. We have two names that happen to be boys' names (but they really sound like girls' names.) We also nixed some of our favorites because they were simply too popular -- we didn't want our daughter lost in the sea of "Emmas." I think we did very well, as we often get compliments.

But now I'm wondering if perhaps parents overthink this whole name thing. Although I'll still stand by avoiding the strange spellings and names that are too popular -- it's not the name a young woman has, it's her character and her skills that determine her strength.

Case in point: If you had introduced me to Officer Kimberley Munley a week ago, I may have smirked inside my mind. I had just that sort of reaction when I met an Officer Brittany on my local police force. I thought, how can you take a woman with that kind of name seriously in that kind of role?

Nadal Hasan learned you don't mess with Officer Kimberley.

But now we all know that Officer Kimberley is a tower of strength -- a mom who had the presence of mind and the courage to take down a killer on a rampage. Even after she had sustained bullet wounds to the her legs and wrist -- even as half the blood in her body was beginning to drain out.

So whereas my daughters were already on the road to learning skills like balancing their own checkbooks, keeping a budget, learning to drive stick shift, changing air filters and burnt out bulbs, using a power drill, knowing self-defense tactics, etc etc...

Now I'm beginning to think that using a firearm might have to be included. Though I'm still not crazy about having a gun around -- learning to shoot couldn't hurt, and could perhaps help someday.

Comments

[ChunLing]

Well, it's probably true that the first step in learning how not to get shot is knowing which is the wrong end of the gun. Bit of little published but fairly solid behavioral science. Nearly any human, on their first encounter with a firearm, will feel some kind of compulsion to look directly down the barrel. I have no idea why this is, but it does happen.

So even if you don't actually want to teach kids to shoot, it's still a good idea to let that happen in a controlled setting with an unloaded weapon. That way they learn not to do it by getting shrieked at rather than a bullet up the nose.

Eventually you can get around to learning how to properly clear a weapon, but figuring out not to look down the barrel comes first. People who've never been around guns think they wouldn't do something like that, but the first time they have their hands on a gun, what do they do? And kids are terrible. They'll try to hold a weapon by the grip while doing this.

Rules to live (i.e. not die) by:

The weapon is always loaded. Unless the action has been separated from the barrel in a way that you can visually ascertain at a glance, there could be a round in the chamber ready to discharge. So don't assume otherwise...because some assumptions don't just make you an ass.

'Safe' is not. Most safety catches only prevent the trigger from being pulled or disconnect the trigger from the action. Only those safeties which block the movement of the firing pin will prevent an accidental hammer release from resulting in a discharge. A hammer can drop due to any jolt to the weapon. So the vast majority of 'safeties' only impair intentional firing, they'll do little to prevent accidental discharge.

Guns don't kill people, bullets do. Modern ammunition packages all the chemical energy needed to kill along with a convenient 'primer' that can be set off by flicking it with your fingernail. It's all encased in metal to prevent accidents, but that also ensures that any discharge will produce high velocity shrapnel. This stuff ain't candy, kids.

[Pat]

My goodness, Collette, how it must suck to take the time to compose a thoughtful post and then see nothing but ChunLing's
bullsh-t in response.

[ChunLing]

Feel the love.