{"id":152535,"date":"2020-02-03T12:00:02","date_gmt":"2020-02-03T12:00:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/?p=152535"},"modified":"2020-01-27T09:28:14","modified_gmt":"2020-01-27T09:28:14","slug":"how-the-myth-of-the-alpha-male-has-hijacked-modern-masculinity","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/2020\/02\/how-the-myth-of-the-alpha-male-has-hijacked-modern-masculinity\/","title":{"rendered":"How the Myth of the Alpha Male Has Hijacked Modern Masculinity"},"content":{"rendered":"

In “<\/em>Are Men Animals?” anthropologist Matthew Gutmann explores how modern ideas of masculinity repress and harm men.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\"\"<\/a>

Fatherly \u2013 Pinterest<\/p><\/div>\n

14 Jan 2020 – <\/em>What does it mean to be a man<\/a>? More specifically, what does it mean to be a man in the U.S? In Spain? Among Native American communities? There are so many different factors \u2014 both cultural and otherwise \u2014 that are embedded in this question. But what does masculinity look like around the world and what similarities present themselves? And, more importantly, what does how we talk about it \u2014 and attempt to explain away behaviors using biology or speak of men in terms of Alpha and Beta \u2014 say about us?<\/p>\n

In, Are Men Animals? How Modern Masculinity Sells Men Short<\/em><\/a>, anthropologist Matthew Gutmann, a professor of anthropology at Brown University who has spent 30 years exploring notions of masculinity across the United States, Latin America, and China, describes how the ways society can speak about men and explain away their behavior through bad science \u2014 such as when, during the Brett Kavanaugh hearings, testosterone was associated with negative male behavior<\/a> \u2014 limits men\u2019s emotional expression<\/a> and denies them agency and accountability over their actions. For Gutmann, using such terms and phrases as \u201ctestosterone,\u201d \u201cboys being boys<\/a>,\u201d and \u201cjust being a guy\u201d is tantamount to when doctors 30 or 40 years ago would say that women can\u2019t be leaders because their periods made them too unpredictable. In other words, he says, such talk paints men into a corner.<\/p>\n

We spoke to Gutmann about why explaining away masculinity with biology doesn\u2019t help anyone, why the term \u201calpha male\u201d means\u00a0 nothing, and why men comparing themselves to wolves and chimpanzees is not only severely limiting \u2014 it\u2019s also extremely misguided.<\/p>\n

*****<\/p>\n

You\u2019ve spent 30 years looking at masculinity around the world. What were some things you really wanted to address in this book? What was important to you about dispelling myths about masculinity?<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

There is a widespread tendency to say, well, boys will be boys. So in the Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court justice hearings, it was remarkable how many times I read the word \u2018testosterone\u2019 associated with male teenage behavior. As if other boys didn\u2019t have testosterone as teenagers; as if testosterone surging through your blood, if you\u2019re a teenage boy<\/a>, accounts for sexual assault against women. That, to me, is very disturbing, when we assume that teenage boys almost can\u2019t help themselves from assaulting.<\/p>\n

Is there an extent to which being a masculine man is biological, or is more of a cultural definition?<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

I think that you find as much variation worldwide and historically, as you can imagine. There isn\u2019t one way of being a man in any society. But certainly, science and biology have come to be very significant and influential ways of framing or thinking in general. It\u2019s not just about men and masculinity.<\/p>\n

What do you mean?<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

One-hundred years ago, you\u2019d find scientists running all over the place saying, \u201cWomen can\u2019t be leaders.<\/a> There have never been women leaders in parliament, in congress, except for a few queens. That\u2019s because of biology. Don\u2019t you think if women could be political leaders, we would have seen some by now?\u201d<\/p>\n

That was<\/em> a plausible argument. So it\u2019s not a new way of looking at the world, to explain it through so-called science. But it\u2019s bad science. And I think that it\u2019s been too long unexamined with respect to men and masculinity today. The fact is, it\u2019s very easy for people to fall into thinking, \u201cThis is the way men are, and this is the way women are.\u201d But that\u2019s not true anywhere.<\/p>\n

Let\u2019s talk about definitions of masculinity. Is it defined differently in the Western world than in other cultures?<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

It varies a lot within the United States, too, if you really get into it. Among Native American peoples in the plains, a long tradition of what\u2019s sometimes called third-gender, berdache<\/a>, two-spirit people, these kinds of things. And that\u2019s in the United States. But that\u2019s not the dominant way of thinking about men and masculinity, that you have people who were born male but would assume female roles and might have sex with other biological men and that kind of thing, but would not consider themselves gay. But you don\u2019t hear about that stuff, usually, because it doesn\u2019t fit into dominant ways of thinking.<\/p>\n

In Southern Spain, there\u2019s been a long stereotype that if a wife wants to have sex all the time with her husband, she\u2019s trying to kill him off, because men are only born with so much sperm and when it runs out, they die. That\u2019s exactly the flip side of what you would hear about in terms of men and sexual predation.<\/p>\n

One-hundred years ago, in many farming communities in much of the world, where children weren\u2019t going to school, men were taking their kids to the fields<\/a>, particularly their young boys, but also, their daughters. They\u2019re going to spend a lot more time with their children. This is a pattern that is impossible in the city, if you\u2019re driving a bus or working in a factory, you can\u2019t take your kid to work.<\/p>\n

When did the dominant way of thinking about masculinity<\/a> \u2014 being strong and silent, having sexual conquests, etc. \u2014 became really, really mainstream?<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

I think it\u2019s always been around to some extent. But one of the things I would emphasize is that there may be dominant ideas but there\u2019s always been pushback and a lot of confusion, debate, and argument over what it means to be a man. One-hundred and fifty years ago, people were arguing strenuously that women should vote; women should be leaders; men are not the only ones who can do this; that men can be great fathers. But that wasn\u2019t dominant. So you find people pushing back.<\/p>\n

The fact that young men in the United States, and 70 other countries in the world, when men turn 18 or so, they have to register for the draft or a possible draft, and young women do not have to do that, why do we go along with that, unquestioningly?<\/p>\n

Why is that the way it is? Soldiers are not carrying spears or shields. It\u2019s not an issue of upper body strength. It\u2019s because people believe there\u2019s something inherently violent, or potentially violent, about men that makes them more adaptable for war. And there\u2019s no evidence that\u2019s true.<\/p>\n

There are violent men, but most men are not violent. You can even say most people who kill are men \u2014 that\u2019s absolutely true and vital \u2014 but most men are not killers. And that\u2019s just as important. And if it\u2019s biological, you would expect to find \u2018all men this\u2019 and \u2018all men that\u2019 and you don\u2019t. It\u2019s cultural.<\/p>\n

One thing that really intrigued me about your book was how you wrote about such species as chimpanzees and wolves. Is there an extent to which we\u2019ve transposed human ideals of masculinity on to pack animals?\u00a0<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Right.<\/p>\n

Can you walk that out for me?<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

When I was young, I would watch nature shows on TV: Animal Planet, Discovery Channel. When I would hear about the male zebra, or the male orangutan, I would pay more attention, because that\u2019s the way males of those species behave. And, it began to sink in, that \u201cmen do this and women do that.\u201d The problem is that there\u2019s variation among male zebras. There\u2019s variation among male orangutans. But even that pales in comparison among variation among human males.<\/p>\n

What do you mean?<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

If you are a mallard duck, you\u2019re going to behave within a fairly limited repertoire of behavior. If you\u2019re a human male, the possibilities are not endless, but they are vast<\/a>. That\u2019s the big difference. It\u2019s not that it doesn\u2019t take a male and a female, in terms of gametes, to make offspring, and that that isn\u2019t similar across animal species. It is. It\u2019s not like there are no similarities.<\/p>\n

But we trick ourselves into thinking that we have such narrow kinds of possibilities, as humans, if we constantly are comparing ourselves to the chimpanzees, or gorillas or other primates. But it\u2019s very easy to do it. In biology textbooks, in classes at universities, you\u2019re taught that females are choosy across species, and males want to have sex with all the females they can to procreate and spread their seed.<\/p>\n

Right. And men need to do that too, or so the myth goes.<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

If you think about it for half a second, it\u2019s nonsense. Human males are incredibly choosy about with whom they have sex, and most people in the 21st century, when they have sex, they\u2019re not looking to have babies. They\u2019re not looking to spread their seed. That\u2019s not the point.<\/p>\n

I read an article recently that said that there\u2019s no real concept of an alpha wolf in the wild, but it exists in captivity. What does it mean that men have totally taken on this identity, as being the \u2018alpha\u2019 or the \u2018alpha wolf\u2019 or \u2018alpha male\u2019 when it doesn\u2019t even really exist in nature? That that\u2019s the gold standard of being a human man \u2014 being an \u2018alpha\u2019?<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

I think again, ultimately, it excuses men being in charge. It\u2019s saying that there\u2019s something biological: that men have a need to be in charge, and females have a need for men to be in charge, and the successful men are the alphas. It\u2019s a problem on so many different levels.<\/p>\n

One, it\u2019s actually healthier, in many species, to be a beta male<\/a>. You don\u2019t have nearly the same levels of stress. It can be measured through cortisol levels. Beta males among chimps are a lot healthier, in many respects. They don\u2019t have everyone attacking them. There are even some studies that say that they have more sex.<\/p>\n

But beyond that, what\u2019s curious is that you have other species \u2014 wolves, bonobos (the so-called pygmy chimpanzees) \u2014 where you have alpha female led troops to a much greater extent. Females have much more of a say in terms of who gets what, and what happens when, and all of that.<\/p>\n

But we don\u2019t generally, on nature shows, care nearly as much about those mammals, because they don\u2019t coincide with the idea that men are in charge and should be.<\/p>\n

Just even to the extent that you say that beta males are often happier and healthier, I laughed, because it reminds me a lot of human men who posture and exhibit idealized masculinity. They often have shorter lifespans, are more stressed out, and have all these negative health outcomes<\/a>. So it\u2019s like, what are we doing?<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

I think the language we use today has been too long unexamined about men. And that\u2019s what I\u2019m trying to do in the book, is call attention. Not because it\u2019s exactly the same with respect to men and women when you use this language, but it\u2019s also, potentially, more dangerous if we assume that, because men have certain kinds of hormones in higher levels than women, then anything happens automatically.<\/p>\n

The fact is that women, for ovulation, need testosterone. But we don\u2019t hear about that very much. We hear about levels of testosterone as if they correlated with anything in particular [in terms of male aggression] and it turns out they don\u2019t.<\/p>\n

Right. Women are too hormonal to be leaders. Men have too much testosterone to not be violent.\u00a0<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Hubert Humphrey, a presidential candidate, had a doctor who became quite famous<\/a>. At one point he said, \u201cYou cannot have women leaders in charge of war, because they\u2019re too unpredictable, biologically, and they\u2019re likely to do anything crazy at any time.\u201d There were people who pushed back hard against that idea, but it was much more plausible to a lot more people.<\/p>\n

The fact is, whatever you think about Trump, tens of millions of women voted for him, and somehow, that needs to be explained.<\/p>\n

Were they all just holding their noses about what they thought about his assaults on women and his desire to assault more women? Or, did they say, \u201cLike it or not, that\u2019s just the way guys are! He\u2019s just a guy\u2019s guy! And more guys would do it if they thought they could get away with it!\u201d<\/p>\n

That, to me, is the most dangerous kind of thinking around. It\u2019s not just men who have that thinking. It\u2019s women, too.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s funny. The sexist assumptions about women \u2014 that they can\u2019t be leaders because of their hormones \u2014 are used to help limit their engagement with politics or their roles in leadership. And then, on the other hand, the really sexist misguided assumptions about men \u2014 that their testosterone makes them monsters or insatiable sex addicts or whatever \u2014 serves to give them a pass to do whatever. It\u2019s like the same dynamic, but moving in opposite directions.<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

I agree. I\u2019ve given talks on this subject and I\u2019ve had women tell me, \u201cI agree a lot with what you\u2019re saying, but the fact is that men are more aggressive than women<\/a>.\u201d And I think we need to really, as the academics would say, \u2018unpack\u2019 that idea. What do we mean when we say men are more aggressive? I\u2019ll start pointing in the room. Is this guy more aggressive than that woman? What about that guy over there? And all of the sudden, the argument falls apart, because if you\u2019re actually talking about real people, it doesn\u2019t necessarily apply at all. We all know that. Not all men are more aggressive than all women. It\u2019s a ridiculous thing to say. But the phrase, \u2018men are more aggressive than women,\u2019 if you don\u2019t challenge it, is very easy to make and people nod their head and say, \u201cYeah, that\u2019s just the way it is.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cMen want to have sex more than women.\u201d \u201cYeah, right.\u201d<\/p>\n

25 years ago, people told me that men are more visually stimulated than women and that\u2019s why men like porn and women don\u2019t. I didn\u2019t believe it was true, but I had no argument. Then, the internet became widely available and women started watching porn<\/a> in the privacy of their own homes. The number of women watching porn went up dramatically when there was no longer the issue of having to do it so publicly.<\/p>\n

This biological \u2018fact\u2019 of visual stimulation just disappeared as an argument, and you don\u2019t find that anymore to nearly the same extent. Similarly, it\u2019s very easy to make these general statements, but we need to look more carefully, because there\u2019s tremendous variation. It\u2019s because of that variation that there\u2019s hope.<\/p>\n

Go to Original \u2013 fatherly.com<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

14 Jan 2020 – In “Are Men Animals?” anthropologist Matthew Gutmann explores how modern ideas of masculinity repress and harm men.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":152536,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[166],"tags":[290,1815],"class_list":["post-152535","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-interview","tag-culture","tag-masculinity"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/152535","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=152535"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/152535\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/152536"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=152535"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=152535"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=152535"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}