Over at Facebook, a friend of a friend opined that if a man tries to be an alpha male, it's a sure sign that he will never be one. Either you are or you're not. My FB friend disagreed. I agree. With his disagreement.
I have been a powerful male in organizations, but never really THE one. And although I am sure that my partners and boyfriends would all say that I have a strong personality, it is clear to me that prefer to connect with men who are somewhat stronger in personality than I am. I am not an alpha male. I would describe myself as a beta male with alpha traits. I am fine with that, but if I wanted to ramp it up, I don't think that would disqualify me.
Funny are the things that a culture or moment decides are just givens of nature, unchangeable, and which are capable of alteration. As I have noted before, we are asked to believe --nay, even cheer-- when born males or females try to change their gender. But someone who tried to change their race would be regarded with contempt and incredulity.
Our culture is constantly hectoring us to change and improve on a wide variety of fronts, but as irrationally as can be, decides that other parts of us are fixed and in fact ought not be tampered with.
The mixed message is: be who you are, you have nothing to prove, and while you're at it, pursue personal and global transformation. Oh, and heal the planet.
In discussions of manhood, it is frequently heard that if you have to prove your masculinity, then you are less of a man than a guy who never feels the need to. BS. Historically, has it not been essential to manhood that you have to achieve it? Why ought it now be a birthright just because you have a dick...or wish you did? Jack Donovan just wrote a piece called the Commodus Complex. It is about refusing to accept ideals and instead reshaping the definition of what you want to be by what you already are. In the LGBT world, it is commonplace to hear that a transman is a real man, along with drag queens. This kind of stuff is endemic to our society. As the Dodo says in Alice: Everybody has won and all must have prizes.
There are things I am naturally good at and things that always give me a hard time and at which I often fail. There are other things that I have not been naturally good and now am better at. Because I tried.
To be fair, it is not obvious which parts of us are fixed and which are not. But I resist our current culture's combination of therapy and narcissism about which is which.
2 comments:
Shouldn't we seek for contempt also as a motive for drawing back from 'alpha male' as one's ego ideal? So much contempt goes into the construction of the ego ideals imposed on us from early childhood onward. Aversion to the main role -- the alpha role -- comes naturally to those who intuit this reality; so this sort seem to have a "less strong personality." (Authorities give over to schoolmarms the value criteria that they most wish to override in the long term, don't they? -- even when these criteria are difficult or impossible to speak against.)
Accordingly the "class clown" role is often taken up in part as a way of aggression and even outright refutation of the prevailing ego ideal, and again from rather early childhood onward. Doesn't the buffoon gain greater honour (the only real honour, the only honour that counts) than the goody-goody? whether in the Boy Scouts, the Communist Pioneers, or the Hitler Youth.
I bet this occurs even in the military: I bet the best NCOs scoff at the brass pleasers -- probably these 'best' are the best in military competence too.
Presumably the actually competent male -- for whom manliness is not a theme -- cringes to be deem'd an "alpha male." Much more admirable vis-a-vis the guys and even the womengirls whose opinion counts, to be able to make fun of one's own career climb, competence in bed, knowledgeability in wines or whiskeys, etc. This especially since
'alpha male' ability in seduction of women (being a 'player') is simply not an honourable thing. Joking about one's incompetence in romance is an amiable way of maintaining one's honour while not insulting today's womengirls for being 'playable.'
When an important task does arise, e.g. leading men through dangerous jungle (I think of the remarks made about Oliver North in this regard, since the contrast with the Beltway circus was so intense), then the respect that is merited is direct -- the Congress should not be permitted to award any medals of honour, nor the White House either. Insulting enough that higher ups in the military system -- shot through with freemasonries, they say -- should award medals for bravery. Also offensive that pop psychologists or pop anthropologists and journalists should chime in with "alpha male" descriptions, as though the bravery and the comraderie are mere epiphenomena of genetic material's unintentional drive to spread around or survive or something. imho.
P.S. To the extent that one would reasonably like to get revenge on the authorities who imposed stuff on one's ego, then buffoonery and ostensible failure (Woody Allen, David Letterman, but also before them Bob Hope and what's his name with the violin) do well for aggressive revenge on the authorities.
Thanks for the link and the post.
Read this post by Max. I've met him. He's my size but his presence is bigger. He has the hunter/warrior traits. But he is ALL ABOUT TRYING -- he never stops.
http://www.fkinonline.com/strictly-personal/lack-of-motivation/
I will never be Max, but the "push" is inspiring. So much better than what the "just be yourself" crowd has to offer.
Post a Comment