Tuesday, 19 February 2013

A man's world?

At one time or another, our three main political leaders have all been referred to as boys in a pejorative sense. To my mind the term seems to be more than a simple insult - there is something boyish, something not particularly masculine about these guys.

Just look at them.

I don’t mean to imply in that they are not rampantly heterosexual, although the image conjured up by that caveat is not a happy one. Yet I do think they lack the overt masculinity we once expected from most if not all of our male political leaders. Our female leaders too I suspect, but that’s another issue.

These men are not warriors wielding a blood-spattered broadsword high over their heads. They do not lead from the front, urging us on with a maniac war-cry ringing across the field of battle, sending a shiver of pure dread down the quivering spine of every foe – ie the EU.

Of course not, this is the twenty-first century.

This is the era of grey suits, trim hair, shiny shoes and neatly-pressed trousers. Clean-shaven and somewhat fleshy faces suited to the sterile atmosphere of the meeting room. Soft handshakes, manicured nails and a faint smell of soap mingling with the coffee and the faint, almost imperceptible hum of real life so very far away in a distant background.

Maybe it is no longer a man’s world and we should not be surprised at the lack of real men willing to demean themselves by climbing the greasy pole without so much as a decent sword to hack the enemy into tiny quivering pieces.


Sam Vega said...

George Galloway is a politician who seems to overtly cultivate a form of masculinity. Beard, cigars, combative attitude, and a certain stern Islamic rectitude, as if he were constantly on the lookout to chase a predator away from his tent. But I wouldn't want him in charge of anything that impinges on my life.

I suspect that mass democracy has done for masculinity, femininity, and all forms of individualism. The most important thing is not to spook the electorate - not to represent anything that electorally significant groups in the population can object to.

A very interesting topic, this reviewing past politicians for butchness. Wilson was masculine without being particularly aggressive. Callaghan was the blokeiest of the lot. There was a lot of camp posturing about Scargill's performances, though.

A K Haart said...

Sam - it is an interesting subject and as you say, seems to be an aspect of losing our individuality.

Interesting comment about Scargill. I never saw him in that light, but always thought him odd.

James Higham said...

What is missing is gravitas and sound policies.

A K Haart said...

James - yes, they have little or no gravitas.