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.
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.

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.
ReplyDeleteI 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.
Sam - it is an interesting subject and as you say, seems to be an aspect of losing our individuality.
ReplyDeleteInteresting comment about Scargill. I never saw him in that light, but always thought him odd.
What is missing is gravitas and sound policies.
ReplyDeleteJames - yes, they have little or no gravitas.
ReplyDelete