SIDE-SADDLE VS. CROSS-SADDLE 81 



We have, then, four charges against the side-saddle 

 which we are more or less forced to admit are serious 

 ones, and what is more, just ones. That none of these 

 charges are applicable to mere hacking in a side- 

 saddle, but refer only to jumping, hunting, and polo, 

 in no way alters the fact that they score heavily against 

 the general use of the side-saddle, unless we are able 

 to prove, as we hope to do, that the charges against 

 the cross-saddle are equally as heavy, and that the 

 disadvantages of the latter counterbalance the advan- 

 tages. 



(1) A woman in a cross-saddle has a very insecure 

 seat, while in the side-saddle her seat is even firmer 

 than that of the average man, a fact which a man is 

 usually willing to admit. Physically, if for no other 

 reason, a woman is not suited to ride astride: her hips 

 are too large, her thighs too thick and round, and her 

 legs too short from the knee up; at the same time she 

 is " cushioned" too high to look well or to sit firmly 

 in a cross-saddle. A man who rides correctly, only 

 occasionally applies any pressure with the calves of 

 his legs, and grips largely with the muscles on the 

 inside of the leg, half-way between the thigh and the 

 knee. In the average woman this part of the leg is 

 round and fleshy instead of being flat and hard. 

 Furthermore, most women are knock-kneed, a dis- 

 advantage over the " bowed" or bandy legs of the 

 average man, which is hard to overcome. 



To say that all Western cow-girls, who of course 

 ride astride, have miraculously firm seats, is no argu- 

 ment whatsoever, for the Western saddle is entirely 

 different from the English saddle used by us in the 

 East. The Western saddle has a high cantle, which 

 forms a back rest, and a dished seat, and it has a large 



