ManicDDaily

I’ve heard two interesting stories about stores lately.  One, from my husband about a sports shop in upstate New York.  To give context to the story, my husband is a hunter, has been a hunter from the time he was a boy, was at one point (presumably before dues were required) a member of the NRA.

His memory of upstate sports stores from his youth, and even from ten or fifteen years ago (okay, dear—from his continuing youth), was of showcases filled with hunting rifles.  There might be a few pistols, but even those were, primarily, implements for hunting game–something someone might take on a camping trip.

On a recent visit to a sport store, however, in a very small, seemingly peaceful town, in the Catskill Mountains (prime hunting territory), my husband noted that about half of the store’s showcase was now given over to assault weapons.  These, he said, are not the types of guns one would use hunting animals==that is, non-human animals.  They are weapons modeled on the M-16s carried by soldiers, too heavy, too violent for game.   A couple of times in the store, my husband also heard the name “Nancy” as in “Pelosi” as in “getting one before she takes ’em away.”

The second store story arises from a friend’s recent trip to Victoria’s Secret in search of a bra on sale.  My friend has liked Victoria’s Secret in the past, not so much because of the sexy lacey-ness of its gear (well, maybe a little because of that), but mainly, supposedly, because of its large inventory of sizes and styles, particularly of bras.  On her recent trip, however, she found it impossible to buy:  every single bra was a “push-up” – so wired and padded that it was unclear how a human breast was supposed to fit in.    (It’s supposed to hover, presumably, someplace above the fabric, cushioning, metallic whalebonesque polymers.)

These are second-hand stories from reliable sources (I swear!), but, nonetheless, anecdotal.

Still, I can’t help but wonder about the connection: a seeming rise in assault weapons; a seeming rise in cleavage.

What does it mean?    That U.S. society likes things that are considered, non-aggressive, reserved, even less than usual?

That U.S. society is more than ever obsessed by bombast? Bimbobast?  Blastbast?

It worries me. (I’m sorry, I can’t help it–even the Victoria’s Secret stuff worries me–I’m a child of the Sixties.)

Whatever it means does not seem to bode well for Obama’s mid-term election results.

PS–the drawing above is not meant to imply that women in bras were buying the assault weapons.  I just wanted to put them both…errr.. all… in a single drawing.