Dutch psychologist, primatologist and ethologist Frans de Waal has posted a fascinating interpretation of the interactions between the two candidates during last Friday's debate.
De Waal felt it necessary to correct David Broder's Washington Post piece from today entitled "McCain as the Alpha Male", wherein Broder notes:
"... an imbalance in the deference quotient between the younger man and the veteran senator -- an impression reinforced by Obama's frequent glances in McCain's direction and McCain's studied indifference to his rival."
In other words, Broder twists McSame's refusal to look at Obama as a sign of strength and Obama's frequent glances at McSame as submissive. It takes neither a genius nor a primatologist to demonstrate how wrong Broder's reading is, but let's look at de Waal's reasoning anyway.
A confident alpha male chimpanzee would never show studied indifference. I have seen such behavior only in males who were terrified of their challenger. [...]
A self-confident alpha male just approaches his challenger and sets him straight, either by attacking him or performing a spectacular display of his own. No avoidance of eye contact: he takes the bull by the horns.
It rather is the hesitant or fearful alpha male who avoids looking straight at the other [...]
Some commentators have read this as arrogance or condescension on McCain's part, and graciousness on Obama's. De Waal nails it for what it is: McCain was shit-scared of Obama's challenge, period. Whether Obama did it graciously or not is beside the point - he is trying to defeat the older man, and this is fundamentally an act of aggression. McCain's reaction was a bog-standard primate expression of insecurity and cowardice.
Moreover, de Waal writes:
I read the body language between McCain and Obama as that between a senior male being challenged by a remarkably confident junior one. The senior didn't know exactly what to do. He avoided eye contact and body orientation, probably realizing that a direct confrontation might not go his way.
If McCain was an alpha male, it was an incredibly insecure one.
While the tactic of ignoring the challenger may occasionally work,
[it] also signals weakness. One day, the challenger will pick up courage and do something more drastic, such as hitting the old guy's back. If the latter still tries to ignore his challenger after this, he's toast.
Okay, we're not chimps, but I hope there's enough primal instinct left in Obama and his team to recognize that, after Friday's debate and McCain's conspicuous display of insecurity, all it would take is one or two more well-placed pokes to force the famously explosive bastard to, well, explode. And that would be the end.
ADDENDUM:
An interesting paragraph from the second part of the article, which addresses the primatological implications of McCain's choice of a female of reproductive age as his running mate:
Seeing an older male paired with a much younger female sets off red flags in the heads of many women, so that for McCain and Palin to appear side-by-side may be problematic. This is another major drawback to his choice of running mate, since appearing together is a critical part of political communication. It show others who your coalition partners are. Male chimps who are united groom each other, walk together, display in synchrony, all of which tells everybody else "we stick together, don't mess with us." This is relatively easily done between males, and such bonding has indeed been on display between Obama and Biden, two differently aged males with mutually understanding smiles and back slaps. Following the debate, Biden was on TV to praise Obama's performance (not unlike the way chimps hoot along with their heroes from a distance to signal support), whereas Palin was nowhere in sight.
It may be hard for McCain to avoid the appearance of being a loner.
UPDATE:
A couple of commenters who work with animals have this to say
Along with everybody else, I was watching McCain's body language and noting the dissonance between his actions and his words.
I've seen this kind of behavior in both types of animals with which I have close association: Packs (dogs) and Herds (horses)
If I had to categorize McCain after watching the debate, much as I assess a dog I've been asked to evaluate, I would put him down as a "fear-biter".
Quasi-aggression that is masking behavior for fear or insecurity makes an unreliable dog - one that will bite under pressure and lash out in a frenzy for little or no reason at all.
In other words - a dangerous, dangerous animal.
luvsathoroughbred
I think people really are missing the point about McCain's failure to look at Obama. McCain was afraid of Obama. It was really clear--look at how much McCain blinked in the first half hour. I study monkey behavior--low ranking monkeys don't look at high ranking monkeys. In a physical, instinctive sense, Obama owned McCain tonight and I think the instant polling reflects that.
So McCain may have given away his status as a low-ranking monkey. I'd never even considered monkey rank.
reported from TPM by ramara
Thanks!