The articles regarding Belle Starr and Calamity Jane left me with a sense of disappointment. The historical stories about these two women are obviously exaggerated. Neither article really described the essence of each these women. In both articles, the author uses the word "desperate" to describe Belle Starr and Calamity Jane, meaning they are hopeless or have lost all hope. Are these two women really hopeless or is this the way society perceives them because their behavior is not typical feminine behavior imposed by society in the 1800s? Glenn Shirley commented in Belle Starr and Her Times: The Literature, The Facts, and the Legends, "Added to these virile characteristics are often the worst qualities of woman: namely, an excessive desire for revenge, cunning, cruelty, love of dress, and untruthfulness...." I find it interesting he considers these the worst qualities of woman, do they not also pertain to men?
Both articles represent Belle and Calamity Jane as outcasts who are often seen behaving more like men than women. They both dress in pants and possess the ability to emulate men with their language and behavior. Interestingly, they both accept or embrace their feminine side. Calamity Jane understood the necessity of dressing and acting like a woman in order to support herself.
The writers were very disparaging when describing both of these women, over exaggerating their rebellious, raucous behavior. My sense is the behavior of these women was more a means of survival as opposed to being a choice. The both, however, seemed very comfortable with who they were, even if they were not accepted by society.
