The Alpha Male: just an idiot?

You know I fancy myself a philos'pher. I think about things.

So, I've been thinking about how monkeys have a lot of sex.

Now, stick with me, because this is something I spend A LOT of time thinking about, and let me tell you it's amazing how much sex monkeys have. Amazing.

So maybe you don't know this, or maybe you just spend less time thinking about monkey sex than I do, but Bonobos, the type of apes most closely related to us humans, are dirty, dirty funky-love-rocket rollickin' primates. In fact, it seems they are "obsessed with fornication!" as the likes of Pat Robertson might put it.

And we're not just talking your manual-approved "'peg A' in 'slot B'" stuff, we're talkin' all types of sex--no lists here folks, because you people have imaginations, but bonobos seem fond of just about every kind of "jungle boogie" that the most imaginative and unrestrained of us humans can think of and then some.

Got it? Monkey sex. lots of it. I think I got that point across pretty well, so I'm going to leave it for a little bit, but don't go anywhere, we'll soon get back around to Bonobo-bangin' and that's a promise.

So something that really annoys me is when I meet some earnestly cool, smart, philosophical dude, and, because it's clear that I spend some time thinking about things too (mostly monkey sex) they decide to inform me about their own great "philosophy of strength." This is usually a mesh of Nietzsche and Darwin... some Herman Hesse novel from college and whatever they read last all thrown together. The history of western thought, they inform me, is all a grand tribute to the Ubermensch that the dude obviously represents. Through my college days, I often heard this type declaring himself an "Alpha Male," for his "ability and willingness to conquer and dominate, while others will only follow."

To me, this Alpha Male philosophy is a just a complex justification for a selfish, nationalistic, ethnocentric world view. Historically, this "philosophy" of "social Darwinism" was based on an illiterate misreading of the writings of Herbert Spencer popularized by a Calvinist preacher with a political axe to grind. If you want to get into the history of it check out the wiki page on Social Darwinism. However, it's unnecessary for further exploration of our topic at hand:

Monkey Sex.

A misreading or no, the basic expression of this "philosophy" is Darwin's "survival of the fittest" applied to humans and human systems--both as a governing philosophy and as a personal philosophy. On the social end this "philosophy" was and is a justification for the violent European expansionism and world domination: "by wiping out the weak, we were doing nature's work and making the human race stronger!" I've heard plenty of Alphas say. Of course, many Social Darwinists have believed (and many still do) that this European conquest was proof of the superiority of the "white race."

Today, this "philosophy" has had a tremendous rebirth with the "conservative movement," a movement far from being conservative. Strangely, it's newfound popularity is due to its necessity as a binding agent between the two waring factions of the modern American "Republican Party:" the pro-corporate mercantilists and the religious fundamentalists. Though Wacko Religious leaders refuse to admit evolution in the biology classroom, they see Darwin as some extension of "Gawds Own Justice" on the street:

"Nature's remedies against vice are terrible. She removes the victims without pity. A drunkard in the gutter is just where he ought to be, according to the fitness and tendency of things. Nature has set upon him the process of decline and dissolution by which she removes things which have survived their usefulness."

-- William Graham Sumner, propenent of Social Darwinism, Arian superiority, "free trade" and overall idiot.

Newt Gingrich: Monkey or just monkey-brained?

More recently, Newt Gingrich used to regularly invoke this idea in his "contract with America" stump speech, saying that in the old days there used "hammer and anvil which would fall on the unwed mothers (and apparently other vagrants of society, though Newt really seemed to have a thing for unwed mothers...)" the goal of the republican revolution in his view was to destroy the social safety net and "bring back the hammer and anvil."

As a personal philosophy, it works the same way: by "kicking ass and taking names" and being the Uberdude, you fulfill your natural destiny and make the race stronger or some such nonsense. And since it is "human nature" to try to dominate, it's better to be the wolf than the sheep....

Now, I don't know anything about any of that, but I DO know about monkeys. And sex. And let me tell ya, ya just can't keep the lil' buggers out of the nookie jar!

That is, at least when you're talking about the smartest and most human-like of the super-monkeys called Apes, the Bonobos. The Common Chimpanzee on the other hand, would rather spend their time in the sort of aggressive behavior engaged in by the likes of English Soccer fans, but the Bonobo follows the dictum of the 60 hipster: "make love, not war, man."

And that's what's so interesting about monkey sex, or at least bonobo Sex: they make love not war. Researchers say it's now clear that they actually use 'doin' it' as a way of building community and resolving conflict! And from what modern mathematics and evolution theory tell us, it was jism that acted as their social cohesion and supplied their darwinian "fitness." And it was likely the same behavior that paved the way for modern man: the intellectual marvel of an animal that created the pet rock and "Goonies."

Truly remarkable.

For more about that you can start here: http://williamcalvin.com/teaching/bonobo.htm.

See, here's the truth about humans; dude, we're like really, really wimpy animals. Tony Soprano, naked in the woods V a Grizzly Bear: ain't even going to be close. But, put the Grizzly against Tony and a bunch of his burley mob buddies and you got a hit "reality" series.

Anyway, it clearly isn't aggressive dominance that led us to the top of the food chain.

Modern "game theory" has explained that the "fittest" often refers to the party "fittest for cooperation." Models repeatedly show that the old axiom "the nice guy finishes last" just ain't so! In fact, it seems that aggressors usually end up losing first! For a primer on modern game theory, check out the great book: The Universe and the Tea Cup. Or just go play a multiplayer online strategy game like "Wesnoth:" as a mater of basic survival, everyone teams up on the most aggressive players first.

So here's the problem, its not that there isn't social evolution, the problem is in thinking that the World Wrestling Federation represents the apex of human achievement: it's conflating "fitness" with aggression. Evolution is simply nature's problem solving method--it certainly effects humans and human societies and even human ideas. And there are certainly lessons we can take from evolution and apply its problem solving method to our own lives and to our societies.

Darwin's lesson for our lives is not to look out for #1, it's to look out for everyone, and even the whole planet. Evolution's mission for the individual is not to step on others in our scramble to the top, it's to become your own fullest most unique solution to the problem of living-- to fully take advantage of your unique perspective and place in the world. The pragmatic individual will make sure their lifestyle is consistent with an informed view of natural selection, and will be true to their own diversity and kind and compassionate to their fellow beings. The pragmatic individual will understand that nature will prune the aggressors and be kind to those leading a sustainable equitable lifestyle, and they will use that math to their advantage. They will make a little more like the bonobo and a little less like the common chimpanzee.

The Alpha Male mentality and the corresponding modern "conservative" movement is historically, mathematically and scientifically uninformed to start with. But more importantly, it's bad as a pragmatic matter.

It's no way to build a society, and an even worse way to build a life.

CONGRATULATIONS

Congratulations to my dear friends on their kick-ass wedding this weekend. Not much more to say than have fun in the Aloha State.

I on the other hand will be spending this week in the Rather Frazzled State.

Looking to do some major cleaning and reorganizing of the blog... I've decided to keep the blog front page but also make a page of cleaned up essays and entertainments and informations and so on.... Just an effort to make my thoughts a little more organized and accessible.

The problem is figuring out how to do it....

holy crap!

I never thought move on and the christian coalition would agree on anything, but I guess the pigs are flying home with the cows today!

Both groups are going to post an add together against the pending internet control bill. And this when I had just given up hope that the internet would remain the free and beautiful thing it is today. I just can't imagine not seeing homestar anymore because it would cost to much for all of those big files to run.... or to search for a recipe and only be able to access those annoying bland recipes from kraft food that require a bunch of terrible brand name corn products.... I had assumed with republicans controlling congress that the end of the internet as anything other than a corporate advertising tool was imminent...

And do I really have the christian coalition to thank for hope?

Armed Man a Success

The U.S. premier was quite a success, everything I heard from the audience was positive. As for my opinion, I think the work is a great in someways, but not necessarily a great work of art... gah, gotta go, more later...

no time no time...

Dress rehearsal tomorrow for "the Armed Man!"

I am quite excited, the music that I know has already grown on me quite a bit, and I'm excited to hear the parts I'm not in. Saturday will be the US premier of the new work. In the way of advertisement, take a listen at a small part of the European premier: "better is peace than always war" I especially like the end of this movement.

Nothing but work

I do nothing but eat sleep work these days, so no blog time.

I hope after this week I will have an hour or so of free time.

Dull dull boy I am right now.

Underpants... profit.

If you've looked at more than two posts on this blog, then you know that my frequent topics range from singing to bawdy limericks to Mr. Rogers back to Mindless Self Indulgence, around the corner to sociology and politics, insideout to the English language and how to teach it better, up to photography and down to fiction and poetry, nature.... basically I'm intensely curious about everything right down to why it is that that certain kind of guy just can't seem to keep his shirt on... it's like the "as seen on COPS" fashion movement.

Speaking of "as seen on COPS," in the past week or so, the PO-lice have visited our small apartment building 3 times, twice in the same day because of vandalism and once because our neighbors were having a domestic dispute. And it must be something about the flashing lights, because when the cops pulled in the the guys next door all took off their shirts and came to the windows to say "hey, hey, somethin matter fer down there?"

Though from the trajectory of egg splatter it was clear that the eggs were thrown from his back porch, I decide to play it cool and not say anything accusatory:

"Yeah well someone just egged the cars in our parking lot in broad day light"

"Uh, weel we don't got no eggs and you can check"

Right, I mean they wouldn't have any eggs *NOW* would they?

What the heck am I looking at down there?

The "pictures" of voices down below were made using a program called PRAAT. PRAAT is a tool for speech therapy that shows the different over-tones in a voice. As I said before, almost any sound you hear is actually made up of many different sounds blended together. So when I hear a trumpet, I hear only a single note, but the sound is actually made of many different notes together. The different notes that go into a single sound are what give that sound it's character. This is why a trumpet and a clarinet sound different, even when they are playing the same note-- they are actually producing many pitches at the same time, the trumpet different ones than the clarinet.

And this is also the reason that a tenor like Pavarotti and a Bass like Hines sound different-- the pitches (or "partials" when we're talking about the notes in a complex sound) that make up a bass sound are different than in a tenor voice.

From the two pictures I posted below, you can see what I'm talking about. A dark bass voice has all of the sound energy concentrated on a couple of intense sound clusters. The first dark line is called the Fundamental-- its the pitch we actually hear. A bass voice has a lot of energy put into the actual pitch we think we hear. The line is very dark and thick because a big percentage of the voices energy is here (more intensity-- "santori time"). Then the line above that determines what vowel sound we hear-- this is also dark in a bass voice. Above that there is one more thick band of sound called the singers formant, which adds beauty to the voice and makes it cary over an orchestra. Actually in a bass voice, the "singers formant" is a combination of the third and fourth partial. But you can see that above the singers formant, there is a big drop off in energy. This drop-off makes the voice sound dark and bassy.

You can see a big contrast to this in the Pavarotti picture. The energy isn't concentrated so heavily in a few areas so the bands are thinner(less intense.) Instead, the energy is spread out over 8 strong bands. These additional bands at the top make the tenor sound beautiful and "bright." At the end of the recording of the Pav, I included a couple of high notes to demonstrate what these top partials add to the voice. The first time, you hear the normal note, then in the second, I've significantly weakened these bands at the top of the voice.

Dude, like I totally see your voice right now....

Gee, I think my old college room mate used to say stuff like that in between 12 packs of ho hos.

This is a spectrograph of the great Luciano Pavarotti singing the last high C in the aria "Ah mes amis." To hear an excerpt of this aria, click here!

Seeing voices

ever wondered what a voice looks like? Here's one of my favorite singers, Jerome Hines. To hear the selection this spectrogram is taken from give us a click.

In this picture you see 3 dark blue bands. These are the "pitches" or partials that make up the sound of this voice. This dark bass voice is a composite of "pitces" in two main concentrated areas. The bottom one is the pitch you actually hear, called the fundamental. The one on top is called the "singers formant," or ring in the voice. The singers formant is important because few instruments produce sound in this area, so it helps a singer be heard over an orchestra, and adds beauty to the voice. The blue band in the middle determines what vowel sound the listener hears.

Later I'll show a tenor voice so you can see the difference between a high voice and a low one.

Two weeks until break!

And boy do I need it.

Lots to write about, no time to do it....