Gender Roles and Nature Versus Nurture: Is Gender Innate or a Social Construct?

 

The "Nature versus Nurture" debate can be summed up as a battle to determine the cause of why we do the things we do. The "Nature" side believes our behaviors are the result of our genetics, which get passed down from generation to generation. The "Nurture" side believes we're born tabula rasa, or a "blank slate." Our experiences and environment shape our behaviors. 

This debate, at least in scientific terms, dates back to the late 1800's. Francis Galton coined the term "nature versus nurture" when he made the claim intelligence is passed from parent to child (in a precursor to the study of genetics.) A few years prior, folks like John Locke were promoting the tabula rasa belief. 

Throughout the early to mid-20th Century, the "nurture" side of the debate attracted more attention. Part of this came from moral outrage over the application of eugenics laws, which attempted to sterilize criminals, the mentally ill, those with developmental disorders, and others who were deemed "socially inadequate." This often included minorities. Some folks took this farther than others...

Another reason "Nurture" picked up steam was the development of the social sciences, especially psychology. In particular, Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung's respective ideas about psychoanalysis and early childhood influences and John Watson and B.F. Skinner's respective ideas about behaviorism and the power of rewards and punishments drove the belief that biology didn't much matter. 

Finally, the growing ideology of feminism played a significant role in the shift towards "Nurture." The feminists discovered it was much easier to challenge the status quo if a case could be made that there were no real innate differences between men and women, and the obvious differences we observe between men and women was just a function of the social conditioning they receive from birth. Because gender was a social construct, it could be changed with just a few tweaks in how we raise kids. 

Nature and Nurture in the Development of Gender Roles

That influence of feminism turned out to have a profound effect, mostly negative, on our modern society. Margaret Mead, a cultural anthropologist, is often cited as the founder of the idea that gender roles are a social construct. Mead, a staunch feminist, was heavily influenced by her mentor, Franz Boas, who saw science as a vehicle to push is own political agenda. He could simply present his research from a particular angle, or, in some cases, just make stuff up, then pass it off as "science." That "science" could then be used to promote his political agenda.

It's worth noting Boas was opposed to the kinds of eugenics ideas that eventually influenced the Nazis. In that sense, his deceptions were virtuous, but this "means justifies the ends" approach to science betrays the very purpose of science. 

Mead's research involved studying three different cultures, the most significant of which was in Samoa. Her most significant finding claimed that gender roles were not biologically determined, but rather were socially constructed. Mead observed that Samoan girls and boys were allowed to engage in similar activities, such as swimming and fishing, and that there was no shame attached to premarital sex. She also noted that the Samoan culture did not have strict gender roles and that women carried out a lot of traditionally masculine activities. She claimed Samoan men exhibited a lot of feminine traits, like being submissive an openly expressing their emotions. Further, she claimed masculine men were shunned and kept at the periphery of the society. 

 

Mead's research created a foundation for other researchers who made the assumption that her research was accurate (reliable and valid, in science terms.) The researchers who based their work on Mead's include:

• Erving Goffman, who developed the idea of "gender display" and argued that gender is something that individuals "do" rather than something that they "are."
• Judith Butler, who expanded on the idea of gender as a performance and argued that gender is constantly being produced and reproduced through social interactions.
• Nancy Chodorow, who used Mead's work to argue that gender differences are not just the result of socialization, but also of the different relationships that boys and girls have with their mothers.
• Anne Fausto-Sterling, who argued that the binary view of gender as male or female is overly simplistic and that there is actually a wide range of biological variation in human sex characteristics.

Mead's research also influenced prominent feminist writers, including:

• Judith Butler: A leading feminist scholar and philosopher, Butler draws heavily on Mead's work in her own theories about gender as a performance or social construct.
• Simone de Beauvoir: In her landmark book "The Second Sex," de Beauvoir argued that "one is not born, but rather becomes, a woman" and cited Mead's work as evidence of the social construction of gender.
• Gloria Steinem: An influential feminist activist and writer, Steinem has referenced Mead's research in her own writings and speeches on gender and sexuality.
• Bell Hooks: A feminist author and scholar, hooks has written extensively about the intersection of race, gender, and class, and has cited Mead's work in her discussions of gender as a social construct.
• Kate Millett: In her book "Sexual Politics," Millett drew on Mead's research to argue that gender roles are culturally constructed and reinforced through social institutions.

As you probably guessed, Mead's research turned out to be bullshit. Mead spent a few months in Samoa. During that time, she didn't actually interact with Samoan culture. Her entire research consisted of interviewing little girls using an interpreter. She didn't interview boys, adult women, or adult men. She didn't spend time with Samoans in their homes, at their places of work, or while they were doing any kind of recreation. She didn't study their government, their leaders, their teachers, their police, or any other people who could provide any real context for her interviews with little girls. 

Other anthropologists who studied the Samoans from an objective point of view, like Derek Freeman, Paul Shankman, Martin Orans, Geoffrey Gorer, E. Richard Sorenson, Roy Wagner and Ernest Gellner have all studied Samoan culture and expertly dissected Mead's research. 

It turns out Mead learned the lesson from her mentor, Boas: If you have an agenda you want to push, just make up some research. 

All of those researchers and writers who based their work on Mead's work built their reputations on a foundation of mud. The idea that gender roles are a social construct, an idea known as social constructivism, is a big lie. Unfortunately, this belief is still pervasive in modern=day society, and is still being used to rationalize all kinds of blatantly sexist, anti-male policies. 

What Does Actual Science Have to Say About Gender?

Real scientists doing real, unbiased research have made some absolutely fascinating discoveries thanks to the human Gnome project (mapping our genes), the advent of function MRI technology (abbreviated fMRI; technology that allows researchers to see brain activity in real time), and the study of epigenetics.

Epigenetics is the study of heritable changes in gene expression that occur without changes to the underlying DNA sequence. It refers to changes in gene activity that are not caused by changes to the DNA itself but rather by modifications to the DNA molecule or to the proteins with which it interacts. These modifications can be influenced by a variety of factors, such as environmental exposures, diet, stress, and other lifestyle factors, and they can affect how genes are expressed, or turned on or off, in different cells or tissues. Epigenetic changes can have a profound impact on a range of biological processes, including development, aging, and disease susceptibility, and they are increasingly being recognized as important factors in shaping human health and disease.

 

In terms of gender roles, epigenetics has suggested that social experiences and environmental factors can play a role in the expression of genes related to behavior and development. For example, some studies have found that exposure to stress or trauma can lead to epigenetic changes that affect the expression of genes related to anxiety and depression. Other studies have suggested that environmental factors such as diet, exercise, and exposure to toxins can also impact epigenetic changes and potentially influence gender-related behaviors and traits.

Basically, researchers are discovering that gender roles appear to be genetic in nature, and the environment can influence biology to modify that genetic expression. Our genes determine if we have a masculine or feminine persona, but the environment can shape how that masculinity or femininity is expressed within the confines of those genes. 

This is essentially how sexual orientation works, too. We have a lot of evidence the sex you're attracted to is innate, but we have the ability to deviate from that based on the environment. Cough, cough, prison, cough. 

Significantly, Mead's idea that "gender" is infinitely malleable and masculine people can learn to act feminine or vice versa without any consequence is flatly wrong. However, there is some variability in how masculinity and femininity can manifest in different environments, which tracks with what we observe in other cultures both today and in the past. 

Why This Matters for The Ghost Dogs

We're a group of men interested in getting better at being men within the context of a brotherhood of men who hold each other accountable. What it means to "be a man" was aptly summed up with this excellent quote by  Jack Donovan:

“When someone tells a man to be a man, they mean that there is a way to be a man. A man is not just a thing to be—it is also a way to be, a path to follow and a way to walk. Some try to make manhood mean everything. Others believe that it means nothing at all. Being good at being a man can’t mean everything, and it has always meant something”
― Jack Donovan, The Way of Men 

The Meads and other social constructivists argue "being a man" can mean anything, which is clearly wrong. To be a man, we necessarily have to reject the premise that "being a man" can be whatever we want it to be.

 

Indeed, that's precisely what our anecdotal experiences have proven. We've identified what it means to be a man, then developed a way to learn to be a man that fulfills our goals. This is the reason we use The Call of the Wild as an allegory for the path to discovering and becoming a man - the path Buck takes to discover his primal wolf within is the same path we take to discover the primal manhood within us. 

When we answer the call, it's a very specific call we're answering.

~Jason 

***

Evolutionary Mismatch Theory: You're Not Mentally Ill

 

In our modern-day society, mental illness is a major problem. This is especially true for men. Our current approach to mental illness is to treat it like a, well, illness.

A theory that has gained traction in recent years is the "evolutionary mismatch theory." The theory suggests that some mental disorders may be a result of adaptations that were once beneficial in our ancestral environments but have become maladaptive in our modern world.

The evolutionary mismatch theory is a perspective in the field of evolutionary psychology that posits that certain psychological traits or disorders may be maladaptive in our current environment, but were once advantageous in our ancestral past. The basic premise of this theory is that human beings evolved in an environment that was vastly different from the one we live in today. Our ancestors lived in small groups, were hunter-gatherers, and had to deal with various threats, such as predators or other hostile groups. They had to adapt to these challenges in order to survive and pass on their genes.

 

This hunter-gatherer past wasn't that long ago. Humans, in early form, have been around for a looooong time (our early ancestors used fire at least 1.7 million years ago.) We first started moving away from the hunter-gatherer life around the Neolithic period about 12,000 years ago, which was the result of agriculture. Our ancestors realized they could plant and harvest food instead of hunting and gathering food. That technology allowed humans to settle in one place, which started a trend towards villages, then towns, and eventually cities. Here in America, Native Americans existed mostly as hunter-gatherer tribes until Europeans arrived in the 16th and 17th Centuries. In short, our move away from our hunter-gatherer past is a tiny blip on the timeline of humanity.

The modern world we live in today is vastly different than that pre-agriculture world. We live in large cities, have sedentary lifestyles, and have to deal with complex social, economic, and existential threats. Our brains and bodies are still wired to handle the challenges of our ancestral past, but they are not well-suited to deal with the challenges of modern life. This mismatch between our evolved traits and our current environment may be responsible for a lot of known psychological disorders.

Researchers and Theorists

Several researchers and theorists have contributed to the evolutionary mismatch theory. One of the most ardent promoters of this idea is Randolph Nesse, a professor of psychology at Arizona State University. In his book "Why We Get Sick: The New Science of Darwinian Medicine," Nesse argues that many common health problems, such as allergies, anxiety, and depression, are due to a mismatch between our evolved traits and our modern environment. 

I learned this first-hand when visiting my local farmer's market. An old man was selling local honey, which he claimed helped treat allergies. The idea is the bees made the honey from local flora, which contains traces of the allergens that trigger people' allergies. Eating the honey basically trains our immune systems to not react to the various allergens blowing around. 

Other notable researchers and theorists who have contributed to the evolutionary mismatch theory include Leda Cosmides, John Tooby, and Stephen Pinker.

On the surface, this theory seems a little wacky... until you start to consider the common advice psychologists, psychiatrists, and other doctors give to people afflicted with various disorders: 

• Spend time in nature. 
• Exercise more. 
• Eat a better diet of less processed foods. 
• Get more high-quality sleep. 
• Meditate for mindfulness and spend time in the moment. 
• Connect with a small group of supportive people you trust.

Just like or ancestors.

Every professional offers that exact same advice for every single disorder as a first line of treatment. Every one of these pieces of advice replicate the experiences of our ancestors. If those steps don't solve the problem (or, more likely today, people just ignore the advice), other therapy or drug treatments may be used. 

How I Stumbled Upon this Idea

Ultrarunning and barefoot running

 

I first discovered this concept by accident. Around 2006 or so, I was living in Allendale, Michigan (Go Lakers!), an area of the county that has over 200 days without sunshine due to Lake Michigan. It's like a permanent "marine layer" for my West Coast friends. I was suffering from pretty severe seasonal affective disorder. I found running long distances through the wooded trails had a near-miraculous effect - it made by SAD symptoms disappear. For a few days, anyway. In the summer, I found I got the same effect from running barefoot in the warmer months, too. There was something about the sensation of the ground under my feet that just made me feel good.

Fighting

 

A few years later, I was living in San Diego. Not being a city kid, I was under a fair amount of constant anxiety from the perpetual crowds of strangers and traffic synonymous with urban sprawl. I started training at an mma gym (shout out to my Fight Club peeps in San Diego!) and noticed the same "restorative" effect I got from mma, boxing, kickboxing, and jiu jitsu. The anxiety would disappear, sometimes for days.

"Man" Stuff 

Finally, I started the Man Camp group, the precursor to The Ghost Dogs. I found when I embraced "masculine" behaviors, I got the same reduction in anxiety and depression symptoms. This effect was weird; it didn't always involve exercise or exposure to nature. To fully understand this effect, it's important to know I used to avoid 'manly" behaviors because I believed, as many modern men believe, that acting like a manly mad was bad. It led me to develop a tentative hypothesis:

We all have an innate baseline gender role, which is a combination of masculine and feminine traits. The more "live" this baseline, the happier and more fulfilled we feel, and the less mental health symptoms we experience. 

This is a major reason so many men today struggle... society tells us it's bad to express who we really are. And it's killing our mental health. This, of course, is ironic because the people who most vilify masculinity (feminists, social justice warriors, far left radicals, weak, submissive, supplicating men who demand we "redefine" masculinity, etc.) universally accept and advocate for LGBTQ rights on the grounds uncommon sexual orientations (gay men, lesbian women, and bisexuals) and transgender folks are born that way. The obvious hypocrisy is lost on these folks.

At any rate, this idea that men experience anxiety, depression, and other psychological disorders because modern society vilifies our innate drive to engage in masculine behaviors is one of my motives for founding this group. A lone man who attempts to act like a man is easily beaten into submission. A gang of men? Not so much. There's power in numbers, especially when those numbers share a bond of Brotherhood.

Anyway, the Evolutionary Mismatch Theory can be applied to a wide range of psychological disorders.

Examples of Such Disorders

All kinds of disorders can be explained by the theory. More importantly, a lot of disorders can be effectively treated by using a logical solution that aligns with the evolutionary purpose of the disorder.

 

Anxiety: Anxiety may have evolved as an adaptive response to threats in our ancestral environment, such as predators or hostile groups. However, in our modern world, where the threats are less physical and more social or existential, this response can become excessive and debilitating. For example, social anxiety disorder, which affects millions of people worldwide, may be a result of our evolved tendency to be wary of strangers and unfamiliar situations.

Depression: Depression may have evolved as a way to conserve energy during times of scarcity. In our ancestral past, when food and resources were scarce, it made sense to conserve energy and reduce activity levels. However, in our modern world of abundance, this response can become maladaptive and lead to chronic feelings of hopelessness and helplessness. For example, major depressive disorder affects millions of people worldwide and is characterized by persistent feelings of sadness, loss of interest in activities, and difficulty concentrating.

Eating Disorders: Eating disorders such as anorexia and bulimia may be a result of our evolved tendency to seek out high-calorie foods. In our ancestral environment, where food was scarce, it made sense to crave and hoard high-calorie foods to ensure survival during times of scarcity. However, in our modern world of abundance, this response can become maladaptive and lead to dangerous behaviors such as restricting food intake or bingeing and purging.

Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: OCD is characterized by repetitive thoughts and behaviors that are often irrational and interfere with daily functioning. While OCD can be a debilitating disorder, some experts have suggested that it may have evolved as a way to ensure cleanliness and prevent disease. In our ancestral environment, cleanliness was essential for survival, and individuals who were obsessive about cleanliness may have been more likely to survive and pass on their genes.

 

Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder: PTSD is a disorder that can occur after exposure to a traumatic event, such as combat or sexual assault. While PTSD is a serious condition that can significantly impair functioning, some experts have suggested that it may have evolved as a way to prepare individuals for future threats. In our ancestral environment, exposure to trauma was common, and individuals who were able to anticipate and prepare for future threats may have been more likely to survive.

Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: ADHD is a disorder characterized by difficulty with attention, impulsivity, and hyperactivity. While ADHD can be a challenging disorder, some experts have suggested that it may have evolved as a way to enhance hunting and gathering abilities. In our ancestral environment, individuals who were able to quickly shift their attention and respond to changing circumstances may have been more successful hunters or gatherers. Since the 1990's, imagine how many boys we drugged with amphetamines because they couldn't sit through eight hours of boring classwork? Imagine how we could have avoided that cluter-fuck if we would have just changed our perspective?

Seasonal Affective Disorder: SAD, as I indicated earlier, is a type of depression that is associated with changes in the seasons, typically occurring in the winter months. While SAD can be a debilitating disorder, some experts have suggested that it may have evolved as a way to conserve energy during the winter months when food and resources were scarce. In our ancestral environment, individuals who were able to conserve energy during times of scarcity may have been more likely to survive. 

Social Anxiety Disorder: The other SAD is a disorder characterized by intense fear or anxiety in social situations. While SAD can be a debilitating disorder, some experts have suggested that it may have evolved as a way to prevent individuals from engaging in behaviors that could have social consequences, such as being ostracized from the group. In our ancestral environment, social exclusion could have had serious consequences, including a loss of protection, resources, and potential mates.

 

Bipolar Disorder: Bipolar disorder is a disorder characterized by cycles of depression and mania. While bipolar disorder can be a challenging disorder, some experts have suggested that it may have evolved as a way to enhance creativity and problem-solving abilities. In our ancestral environment, individuals who were able to think creatively and come up with innovative solutions to problems may have been more successful hunters, gatherers, or leaders.

Generalized Anxiety Disorder: GAD is a disorder characterized by excessive worry or anxiety about a variety of different topics. While GAD can be a debilitating disorder, some experts have suggested that it may have evolved as a way to enhance vigilance and threat detection. This is kind of what I experienced when I lived in a city and was regularly surrounded by large groups of strangers. In our ancestral environment, individuals who were able to detect and respond to potential threats may have been more likely to survive.

 

Addiction: Addiction is a disorder characterized by compulsive drug-seeking behavior, despite negative consequences. While addiction is a complex disorder with many different causes, some experts have suggested that it may have evolved as a way to enhance reward processing and motivation. In our ancestral environment, the pursuit of rewards, such as food or mating opportunities, was essential for survival, and individuals who were more motivated to seek out rewards may have been more successful.

Notably, severe variations of these disorders, and organic mental disorders like schizophrenia, drug-induced psychosis, dementia, and some types of delirium are caused by actual brain malfunction and are not evolutionary adaptations. People experiencing significant mental illness need to seek medical interventions. 

The Danger of Treating "Mental Illness" Like a Disease

"Pathologizing" mental illness means viewing it purely as a disorder or disease, rather than a natural response to a person's environment or life circumstances. While pathologizing mental illness has led to significant advances in the field of psychology and has helped reduce the stigma associated with mental health, there are some serious consequences and dangers to this "you have a disease" approach.

Firstly, pathologizing mental illness can lead to overdiagnosis and overtreatment, where individuals may be diagnosed with a disorder and receive treatment even if they do not actually need it. This can lead to unnecessary medicalization, stigma, and negative side effects associated with treatment, such as weight gain, drowsiness, or other physical symptoms. Overdiagnosis can also divert resources away from those who truly need them.

Secondly, pathologizing mental illness can reinforce a narrow view of what constitutes normal or healthy behavior. This can lead to individuals feeling like they are defective or broken, rather than recognizing that their behavior may be a natural response to their environment or circumstances. This can lead to a sense of shame and self-blame, and it can make it more difficult for individuals to seek help or reach out for support.

Thirdly, pathologizing mental illness can obscure the social and cultural factors that contribute to the development of psychological distress. This can lead to an overemphasis on individual factors, such as genetics or brain chemistry, while ignoring the broader social, economic, and political factors that contribute to mental health. This can make it more difficult to address the root causes of psychological distress, such as poverty, discrimination, or trauma.

When we shift our perspective and start looking at mental illness as an adaptive trait, several important things happen. We stop thinking we're broken. We also stop believing our mental illness is uncontrollable. Finally, we can assess what's really causing our mental illness.

So what's a good way to re-frame mental illness?

This is Your Superpower That Allows You to Contribute to Your Tribe

Back in our tribal hunter-gatherer days, our unique quirks allowed us to make a unique contribution to our tribe's survival. If we consider "mental illness" to be our unique quirk that allowed us to make a valuable contribution to those we care about, suddenly we see ourselves in a much different light. Your "mental illness" isn't an anchor around your neck dragging you to the depths of despair. Your "mental illness" is you Superpower.

 

Earlier, I noted I sometimes suffer from depression, often of the seasonal affective disorder type. It's characterized by two prominent symptoms - apathy and a muting of emotion. I tend to gravitate toward leadership roles. If I were in a hunter-gatherer tribe and I was a leader-type, the short days of the winter months would make me lazy (to conserve energy) and, given my emotional response was muted, better able to make difficult, emotionally-charged decisions about things like food distribution. 

It's the same with the anxiety I experience in crowded environments. The evolutionary purpose is to make me hypervigilant to be temporarily better at observing and reacting to possible threats. If I were in a hunter-gatherer tribe, I'd likely play a "protection' role to guard the perimeter of the tribe. When I was exposed to a lot of strangers, it would be important to determine if any of the strangers were threats, which would be accomplished with the hypervigilance.

While that might always be super-useful in the modern world, explaining my S.A.D. and anxiety in that way frames it in a way that isn't really concerning. I don't obsess or fret over my lack of motivation or hypervigilance, I just ride it out knowing the symptoms will pass.

Or I can just go run around out in the forest on a sunny winter day, go to jiu jitsu class, or go out and accomplish a difficult goal.

Regardless, the Evolutionary Mismatch Theory can be a fantastic way to rethink mental illness. It's obviously not going to replace treatment for severe disorders, but it can be a life-changer for the vast majority of us.

If you try adopting this theory and it works for you, please share this post. It's probably one of the more important pieces I've written. 

Thank you.

~Jason

***

"The Call of the Wild" Masculinity Parable Part Four

 

Read Part One here, Part Two here, and Part Three here.

Chapter 6: For the Love of a Man

Finding the Tribe

Under the care of John Thornton and his two dogs, Skeet and Nig, Buck was slowly nursed back to health. During his time with John Thornton, Buck discovered, for the first time, genuine connection. He had saved Buck’s life, and eventually, Buck saved his, not once, but twice. The two were inseparable. Despite this, the draw of the primitive was still alive and well within him.

In a sense, Buck had found his “tribe” with John Thornton. He felt an incredible sense of authentic bonding, which can be described as true brotherhood, with the man. Their relationship is based on trust and love, the same bonds that bonded gangs of men since the dawn of time. They share a dedication and loyalty that fills both with a strong sense of authentic contentment. John Thornton brings out the best in Buck, which is demonstrated when, on a bet, Buck manages to pull a 1,000 pound sled 100 yards. The winnings allow the pair (along with Skeet, Nig, and a few of Thornton’s friends) to undertake a grand adventure east in search of a mythical “lost cabin” and its promises of great riches.

Buck’s relationship with John Thornton exemplifies the concept of the bonds of brotherhood. They have each others’ backs. They push each other to get  better. They accompany each other on adventures. They share experiences. They have a strong mutual respect. These are the experienced men, for eons, have shared with other men.

“Thornton knelt down by Buck’s side. He took his head in his two hands and rested cheek on cheek. He did not playfully shake him, as was his wont, or murmur soft love curses; but he whispered in his ear “As you love me, Buck. As you love me.” 

 

The bonds shared between the two also highlight another important idea. There are no lone wolves in The Northland. The concept of the independent, self-reliant man operating successfully as a singular operator is a fantasy sold to men as a means of controlling them by isolation. Lone men are entirely reliant on the infrastructure of civilization constructed by rough men working in unison to tame the wilderness. When faced with real adversity, the lone wolf quickly perishes.

Of all the ideas that serve as an allegory for masculinity, the bond between Buck and John Thonton exemplifies the ideal; the place all men should yearn to reach. For without such bonds of brotherhood with a gang of men we respect and hold in high esteem, we’re nothing more than a sad, lonely, ineffective blip in the world.

Chapter Seven: The Sounding of the Call

The Adventure

Chapter seven begins with Buck, John Thornton, and crew made up of two men named Pete and Hans, Thornton’s other two dogs, and a half dozen other sled dogs embarking on an adventure eastward in search of the fabled cabin and the mysterious lost mine that promised untold riches. The journey was pure delight to Buck; he spent all day hunting, fishing, and exploring new, strange places. Unlike Charles, Hal, and Mercedes, John Thornton possessed the skills and knowledge to survive in the Northland.

“John Thornton asked little of man or nature. He was unafraid of the wild. With a handful of salt and a rife he could plunge into the wilderness and fare wherever he pleased and as long as he pleased. Being in no haste, Indian fashion, he hunted his dinner in the course of the day’s travel; and if he failed to find it, like the Indian, he kept on traveling, secure in the knowledge that sooner or later he would come to it.”

This adventure into the unknown, taken with a gang of strong, capable characters who can survive and thrive in The Northland under The Law of Club and Fang, bonded by the primal connection of true brotherhood, perfectly exemplifies how men can win the game of “Survival of the Fittest.” Throughout the novel, Buck grew and evolved with each test. He shed the softness and weakness he was born into in The Southland. Hardened through the fires of adversity and united with other hardened men who shared a deep, meaningful bond, Buck was now capable of conquering anything.

The Call of the Wild

While on their journey, Buck would continue having visions while lounging around the fire. The visions would be of the same other world and the strange, hair-covered man that represented his ancestral past. The  visions were often accompanied by a sound he heard that originated deep in the forest. This call filled him with “great unrest and strange desires” that caused him to “feel a vague, sweet gladness, and he was aware of wild yearnings and stirrings for he knew not what.” 

“Irresistible impulses seized him. He would be lying in camp, dozing lazily in the heat of the day. When suddenly his head would life and and his ears would cock up, intent and listening, and he would spring to his feet and dash away, and on and on, for hours, through the forest aisles and across dry watercourses, and to creep and spy upon the bird life in the woods. For a day at a time, he would lie in the underbrush where he could watch the partridges drumming and strutting up and down. But especially he loved to run in the dim twilight of the summer midnights, listening to the subdued and sleepy murmurs of the forest, reading signs and sounds as man may read a book, and seeking for the mysterious something, that called - called, waking or sleeping, at all times, for him to come.”

One night, a timberwolf appeared outside the camp, announcing himself with a long-drawl howl. Buck met the wolf, “every movement advertised commingled threatening and overture of friendliness; it was a menacing truce that marks the meeting of wild beasts that prey.” The wolf took off with Buck close behind. Hour after hour, they ran together through the forest. “Old memories were coming upon him fast, and he was stirring to them as of old he stirred to the realities of which they were the shadows. He had done this thing before, somewhere in that other and dimly-remembered world, and he was doing it again, now, running free in the open, the unpacked earth underfoot, th wide sky overhead.”

Buck had finally answered The Call of the Wild.

For the Love of Your Brothers

Eventually, Buck remembered John Thornton. Buck sat down. The wolf approached and they touched their noses. Buck turned around and slowly started backtracking towards camp with the wolf by his side. After an hour, “the wolf sat down, pointed his nose upward, and howled. It was a mournful howl, and as Buck held steadily on his way he heard it grow faint and fainter until it was lost in the distance.”

All men, no matter how domesticated we become from the comforts of The Southland, have primal drives and desires. The desire for adventure and risk-taking, engaging in activities where we can use our physical strength, to compete, to dominate, to provide and to protect those we love, to earn status and recognition from other men we respect, to surround ourselves with like-minded men we trust…  all of this is imprinted in our DNA. This desire to do manly stuff is our Call of the Wild.

Like Buck following the wolf into the wilderness, sometimes we need to follow these innate desires. All too often, men in today’s technology-driven world attempt to satisfy these desires with poor substitutes. Drugs, alcohol, materialism, porn, video games… whatever. These surrogates for manhood give us a little rush of adrenaline and dopamine in the moment, but ultimately leave us feeling empty and incomplete. This absence of authentic experiences leads men, good men, to live lives of silent desperation, slowly marching towards their graves without ever really living.

The Birth of the Ghost Dog

The final chapter ends with tragedy as John Thornton and the rest of the crew are murdered by the Yeehats, a local Indian tribe, which happens when Buck is out of camp exploring. He returns to find the Yeehats still in camp.

“A gust of overpowering rage swept over him. He did not know that he growled, but he growled aloud with a terrible ferocity. For the last time in his life he allowed passion to usurp cunning and reason, and it was because of his great love for John Thornton that he lost his head.

The Yeehats were dancing about the wreckage of the spruce-bough lodge when they heard a fearful roaring and saw rushing upon them an animal the like of which they had never seen before. It was Buck, a live hurricane of fury, hurling himself upon them in a frenzy to destroy. He sprang at the foremost man (it was the chief of the Yeehats), ripping the throat wide open till the rent jugular spouted a fountain of blood. He did not pause to worry the victim, but ripped in passing, with the next bound tearing wide the throat of a second man. There was no withstanding him. He plunged about in their very midst, tearing, rending, destroying, in constant and terrific motion which defied the arrows they discharged at him. In fact, so inconceivably rapid were his movements, and so closely were the Indians tangled together, that they shot one another with the arrows; and one young hunter, hurling a spear at Buck in mid air, drove it through the chest of another hunter with such force that the point broke through the skin of the back and stood out beyond. Then a panic seized the Yeehats, and they fled in terror to the woods, proclaiming as they fled the advent of the Evil Spirit.

And truly Buck was the Fiend incarnate, raging at their heels and dragging them down like deer as they raced through the trees. It was a fateful day for the Yeehats. They scattered far and wide over the country, and it was not till a week later that the last of the survivors gathered together in a lower valley and counted their losses. As for Buck, wearying of the pursuit, he returned to the desolated camp. He found Pete where he had been killed in his blankets in the first moment of surprise. Thornton’s desperate struggle was fresh-written on the earth, and Buck scented every detail of it down to the edge of a deep pool. By the edge, head and fore feet in the water, lay Skeet, faithful to the last. The pool itself, muddy and discolored from the sluice boxes, effectually hid what it contained, and it contained John Thornton; for Buck followed his trace into the water, from which no trace led away.

All day Buck brooded by the pool or roamed restlessly about the camp. Death, as a cessation of movement, as a passing out and away from the lives of the living, he knew, and he knew John Thornton was dead. It left a great void in him, somewhat akin to hunger, but a void which ached and ached, and which food could not fill, At times, when he paused to contemplate the carcasses of the Yeehats, he forgot the pain of it; and at such times he was aware of a great pride in himself,—a pride greater than any he had yet experienced. He had killed man, the noblest game of all, and he had killed in the face of the law of club and fang. He sniffed the bodies curiously. They had died so easily. It was harder to kill a husky dog than them. They were no match at all, were it not for their arrows and spears and clubs. Thenceforward he would be unafraid of them except when they bore in their hands their arrows, spears, and clubs.”

In the destruction of his tribe and, more importantly, John Thornton, Buck lost that which had given his life completeness. But in the process, he passed his final test. He had killed man, which he thought an impossible task.

In the aftermath and after a fight for dominance, Buck joins the wolves and assumes the role as their leader. Buck proceeds to haunt the Yeehat, who call him the “Ghost Dog.”

 

“They are afraid of the Ghost Dog, for it has cunning greater than they, stealing from their camps in the fierce winters, robbing their traps, slaying their dogs, and defying their bravest hunters.

Nay, the tale grows worse. Hunters there are who fail to return to the camp, and hunters there have been whom their tribesmen found with throats slashed cruelly open and with wolf prints about them in the snow greater than the prints of any wolf. Each fall, when the Yeehats follow the movement of the moose, there is a certain valley which they never enter. And women there are who become sad when the word goes over the fire of how the Evil Spirit came to select that valley for an abiding-place.”

Buck’s journey from a pampered, tamed, civilized dog in The Southland, born under The Law of Love and Fellowship, to the Ghost Dog that conquered all the trials and tribulations of The Northland under The Law of Club and Fang, is an allegory for the challenge each of us, as men, are destined to assume.

~Jason

 

***

What is Masculinity and the Role Manly Men Play in the Coming Collapse

 

The concept of gender is a fundamental aspect of The Ghost Dogs. We are, after all, a men's group. Understanding the nature of gender is important to understanding the purpose of The Ghost Dogs, why our group was created, what our group does, and understanding how we're preparing forthe future we're likely facing.

The Gender Roles

Gender roles are, at the most basic level, innate, biologically-determined behaviors that reflect the realities of the human experience. Our environment plays a role, but we're born the way we're born. 

Generally, there are two behaviors that exist on a spectrum, masculine and feminine, that interact in a complimentary way. The development of these two sets of behaviors came about as a survival mechanism for our ancestors. Being social animals who rely on each other for survival, humans have developed specialized social roles that optimize the unique biological characteristics that define the differences between men and women. 

 

The biological realities of the differences between men and women is undeniable. Some of the major differences include:

• Body size and composition: Men tend to be larger and have more muscle mass than women, on average. Women generally have a higher body fat percentage than men.
• Reproductive system: Men have external genitalia, while women have internal reproductive organs. Men produce sperm, while women produce eggs.
• Hormones: Men and women have different hormone profiles, with men producing more testosterone and women producing more estrogen and progesterone.
• Voice pitch: Men's vocal cords tend to be longer and thicker than women's, resulting in a deeper voice pitch.
• Hair growth: Men tend to have more body hair than women, with hair growing on the chest, face, and other areas.
• Bone structure: Men typically have denser bones and a larger bone structure than women, making them generally stronger and less prone to osteoporosis.
• Strength and endurance: Men, on average, have greater upper body strength and physical endurance than women.

Every known society and culture throughout recorded human history has conformed to behaviors consistent with these gender roles. Generally speaking:

Men have traditionally been hunters, protectors, and providers, and have therefore evolved physical and behavioral traits that facilitate these roles. For example, men have greater upper body strength, higher levels of testosterone, and a greater capacity for spatial reasoning, which can be advantageous for hunting and defending territory. They also tend to be more aggressive and competitive, which can help them succeed in these roles.

Women, on the other hand, have traditionally been gatherers, caregivers, and reproducers, and have therefore evolved physical and behavioral traits that facilitate these roles. For example, women have a higher proportion of body fat, which can provide energy during pregnancy and lactation, and they have a greater capacity for social and emotional intelligence, which can facilitate nurturing and care giving. Women also have a stronger immune system, which can help protect them and their offspring from disease. 

The Pervasiveness of the Idea of a Duality of Human Nature

This idea of two different-but-complimentary forces manifests in many different ways across cultures and throughout history. Each one of these explanations of this duality closely tracks to the idea of masculinity and femininity. Here's a sample:

• Yin and Yang: One of the more famous constructs, the Chinese defined femininity as the "Yin" and masculinity as "Yang." When balanced, these led to health, happiness, and harmony. 
• Shiva and Shakti: This is the same general idea as used by Hinduism. 
• Specific Family Roles and Grace and Justice: The Abrahamic religions (Christianity, Judaism, and Islam) all promote social roles that track along masculine and feminine roles. Further, the idea of grace and justice, which are important Biblical concepts, track along masculine and feminine lines. 
• Animus and Anima: Carl Jung, the psychologist who gave us the concept of introverts and extroverts, defined masculine and feminine aspects of the human psyche with the constructs of animus and anima. 
• Logos and Eros: The same idea, but from Greek philosophy.
• Liberal and Conservative: Conservatism is often associated with values such as tradition, hierarchy, and individualism, which could be seen as more "masculine" traits. Liberalism is often associated with values such as equality, cooperation, and empathy, which could be seen as more "feminine" traits. When assessing the current state of America, understanding the role of gender roles as political ideologies helps make sense of how and why we have deep social divisions.
  

In general terms, each of these roles plays a specific role in a society. Masculinity generally provides for and protects the society, whereas Femininity generally nurtures and expands the society. One cannot exist without the other, and each tends to ebb and flow in predictable ways. Sometimes masculinity plays a bigger role; sometimes femininity plays a bigger role. Culture after culture throughout history has relied the the constructs of masculinity and femininity, which is why it is featured so prominently.  

Using the parable of "The Call of the Wild", Masculinity is necessary for exploring and eventually conquering The Northland. Strong, courageous, skilled, honorable men, working in conjunction with other men they trust and respect, operate under The Law of Club and Fang to tame wilderness and create civilization. This period usually involves a great deal of technological innovation. In essence, Masculinity tames The Northland and creates The Southland where The Law of Love and Fellowship can thrive. 

Once The Southland is established, Femininity and The Law of Love and Fellowship allows the civilization to advance and expand. There's always a small number of Masculine men needed to maintain order and protect the perimeters of the civilization, but Femininity becomes the dominant role. The civilization will reach a peak of maturity where the people feel safe and the standard of living is maximized. The farther a civilization advances, the more Masculinity is perceived as a threat to the social order, which results in men being encouraged to be soft, submissive, and weak. 

Interestingly, the members of a society at this point universally see their society as "too advanced to fail." This happens because humans tend to be overly optimistic ("We got it right this time!") and perceive human progress as linear, not cyclical, and we're terrible at paying attention in history class.

Without necessary Masculine men to maintain order, crime, corruption, decadence, distrust, sharp social divides, laziness, and moral bankruptcy begin to erode the civilization until one large event or a series of smaller events cause the civilization to collapse. Quite simply, there aren't enough good men skilled at violence to protect the innocent from bad men skilled at violence. People go through a dark period of suffering and hardship, knowledge and technologies are lost, law and order give way to lawlessness and anarchy, and the virtues of Masculinity suddenly become incredibly valuable.

So... Is Masculinity Bad?

In many circles in our modern, technologically-advanced civilization, "Masculinity" is a dirty word. This vilification of masculinity usually comes from one of two angles:

Masculinity is "toxic" because it reinforces unsavory, oppressive, dangerous traits. 

 

The "Toxic Masculinity" crowd claim masculinity is narrowly defined and places great pressure on men to conform to rigid standards, including emotional repression, aggressiveness, dominance, and violence. Further, "Toxic Masculinity" restricts men's career and hobby choices, and rewards competition. "Toxic Masculinity" is claimed to create a fear of weakness and vulnerability, encourages risk-taking, and promotes the objectification of women. 

The people who toss around the term "Toxic Masculinity" usually advocate redefining masculinity as a different form of femininity, and usually advocate men engage in silly behaviors like crying openly in public, constantly ask for permission to engage in behaviors, use closely-policed politically-correct language, make sacrifices for the sake of weak or lazy people, and replacing assertiveness with passivity and submissiveness.

Masculinity is bad because all gender roles prevent equality.

An equally goofy idea comes from the Marxist tradition of believing all social problems would be eliminated if we eradicate any and all inequality. 

Historically, America was founded on the belief that the government wouldn't stand in the way of particular groups or individuals, therefore everyone had the equal opportunity to be successful. If you're willing to take a chance and willing to bust your ass, the sky is the limit. That's why America is "the land of opportunity."

This noble idea gets bastardized, though. The Marxist crowd believes equal opportunity is unfair, therefore we should have equal outcomes. That means no matter how hard you work, no matter how much you sacrifice and suffer, no matter how much risk you take, you deserve the exact same outcome as a lazy, unmotivated slob. Despite the fact that this dumb idea violates everything we know about human nature, it's still pretty popular in circles who are insulated from the realities of life.

These goofy Marxists believe gender roles, specifically masculinity, perpetuate inequality because some men are insanely successful. They see this success as unjust, and believe the government should take the spoils of these individuals' success and distribute it to the people who are not successful. 

Their solution to this problem is to eliminate gender roles and make all humans sexless, androgynous blobs. Just as Marxism is wildly popular among people who are too lazy to be successful, this idea of eliminating gender roles tends to be wildly popular among men and women who are really unattractive. If they can't win the game, so they they demand the rules of the game be changed.

The modern Western world in general and the United States in particular are analogous to The Southland. Aside from a few "Manuels" (the character in "The Call of the Wild" who sold Buck to dog traders), we're living in the safest, most comfortable society in the history of humanity. Predictably, this has created a couple generations of the softest, weakest men, which is supported by research. Aside from being sperm donors, the vast majority of society believe they have no need for manly men. The dirty work conducted by rough men that's needed to maintain our technologically-advanced Western society is largely hidden from view. As such, masculinity is portrayed as something to be feared. Manly men are perceived as aggressive, violent, and oppressive.

Gender in America in 2023

 

I hypothesize America, right now, we're likely past the apex of our civilization. During the late 1990s and early 2000s, the United States experienced a period of sustained economic growth and prosperity, with low unemployment rates, high GDP growth, and a booming stock market. This period was characterized by technological innovation and advancements, as well as globalization and increased trade with other countries.

However, since the early 2000s, the United States has faced a number of challenges and setbacks that suggest a decline in prosperity. These include:
 

• Economic recession: The United States experienced a major economic recession in 2008, which led to widespread job losses, home foreclosures, and a significant decline in economic activity.
• Political polarization: The United States has become increasingly politically polarized in recent years, with growing divisions between the two major political parties and a lack of compromise and cooperation in government.
• Income inequality: Income inequality has increased in the United States in recent decades, with the wealthiest Americans accruing an increasing share of the country's wealth.
• Declining global influence: The United States' global influence has declined in recent years, with challenges to its leadership in areas such as trade, climate change, and international relations.

These factors are exasperated by some rather illogical policies that have led to the collapse becoming an inevitability. Globalization destroyed the manufacturing sector of our economy as factory after factory closed in favor of cheap labor in China and Mexico. Deregulation led to corruption and bad financial decisions that led to the housing collapse in 2008. A lax immigration policy has led to an influx of illegal aliens crossing the border. Opposition to a nationalized healthcare system has led to a serious erosion of our collective health and skyrocketing healthcare costs. Expansive welfare programs have eroded the motivation for many to work, instead preferring to sit at home and do nothing productive. "Defunding the police" gave criminals free reign to victimize the most vulnerable members of our society. Short-sighted environmental policies have polluted or nearly exhausted valuable resources like water, soil, air quality, grazing lands, and forests.

The real problem, though, is that we've passed an important threshold of cooperation. In a growing, stable civilization, Masculinity and Femininity work in conjunction to keep society safe, but also growing and advancing. If crime increases, the Feminine folks let the Masculine folks fix the problem. And when the society stagnates, the Masculine folks let the Feminine folks solve the problem. When these two dynamics stop cooperating, things go to shit quickly. 

 

Today, we're faced with a situation where the Feminine folks believe the Masculine folks are the cause of the problems, so they double down on their Law of Love and Fellowship policies. And the Masculine folks believe the Feminine folks are the cause of the problems, so they double down on their Law of Club and Fang policies.

Either way, we're probably kinda screwed.

The COVID pandemic proved our society is hopelessly divided, and we have passed the point where we can cooperate to overcome social adversity. Even now, after 1, 100,000 Americans have died of the disease and cost us about $16 trillion, people still cling to their emotionally-charged position that points fingers at "the other side." If we can't come together to navigate this catastrophe, we're in deep trouble.

The only way we could prevent our civilization from collapsing is for both types to recognize they need each other and start cooperating. Unfortunately, human nature being what it is, that will not happen. The collapse of our civilization is inevitable. 

 

Does this mean we're heading back to the Stone Age?

Probably not. But our civilization is likely going to face a prolonged, darker future. It's likely we will never again see the prosperity we enjoyed fifteen years ago. Our children and our children's children likely will, but not us. Our cushy, safe world is gone.

For men, specifically the type of men who are reading this blog, this is a good thing. That safe, prosperous, cushy world was a world that sort of hated Masculine men. We were treated like outcasts and punished for wanting to do "guy stuff." We were blamed for all of society's problems and taught we were expendable. All of this and more happened because prosperous societies forget they exist because Masculine men carved the society out of the wilderness, and prosperous societies don't have to come face-to-face with the violence that's necessary to protect that society from the bad people who threaten the prosperity. 

When civilizations collapse, suddenly the Feminine folks come face-to-face with those bad people. Faced with the threat of imminent violence, Feminine folks need Masculine folks for protection. The virtues of Masculinity will be in high demand, and we'll see a Renaissance of manhood. Eventually men will tame this chaos, stability and prosperity will reemerge, and the cycle will begin anew. 

So What Do We Do?

Since 2015, I've been interested in bringing people together. Specifically, I've been experimenting with connecting people who are more Masculine-minded and people who are more Feminine-minded. Those experiments have been an abysmal failure. The problem is people, accurately, see our society starting to fray around the edges. Anyone who remembers the late 90's to early 2000's understands we're in a much worse place today than we were then. Most of us understand our society is crumbling.

The problem is we blame "the other side", however we're defining it. Blame leads to resentment, which leads to hatred. When we treat our neighbors as enemies, our fate is sealed. The collapse becomes an inevitability. 

 

Most people simply stick their heads in the sand and pretend everything is fine. If they ignore the problems, they might just go away. Sadly, the people who ignore reality are often the first people to fall victim to the changing world. In "The Call of the Wild", these people are represented by Curly, the dog that was ruthlessly killed by a hardened Husky minutes after arriving in the Yukon. They've always lived their life by The Law of Love and Fellowship, and they're incapable of perceiving any other reality.

 

Some people cling tightly to their ideological beliefs with the false hope THEIR side is the ideology that will save society if only they can win the ideological battle. They genuinely believe the collapse is being caused by the other side, and forcing that other side to accept their beliefs will save everyone. Today, these groups are represented by groups and movements like Black Lives Matter, Trumpism and MAGA, Feminism, The John Birch Society, Antifa, The Oath Keepers and The Proud Boys, and the Democratic Socialists of America... among others. These groups are like the Yin without the Yang. Their inability to work in harmony with the other, and their failure to understand the complimentary nature of Masculinity and Femininity, are what cause the collapse. Doubling down on their ideologies merely assures the collapse happens faster. 

 

Some people see the world is changing, and attempt to prepare for social collapse by hoarding. But they fail to grasp the post-collapse world is fundamentally different than the cushy, comfortable world that ceases to exist. In modern American society, these people are usually Preppers. To be clear, prepping is not a bad thing; being prepared to weather adversities is something all of us should do. The problem is most Preppers are like Hal, Charles, and Mercedes. Their solution to surviving social collapse is to hoard all the materialistic shit they can so they can continue to live their Southland life in a Northland world. Eventually, their emotional attachment to The Southland will cause them to fall through the figurative ice.

The correct answer is found in historical accounts of the long list of civilizations that have experienced collapse. There are four characteristics of survivors:

• Adaptability: Those who are able to adapt to changing circumstances and find new ways to meet their basic needs may have a better chance of survival.
• Resourcefulness: Individuals or groups who have access to a diverse range of resources and can make the most of what they have may fare better than those who rely on a single source of support.
• Resilience: The life after a social collapse is brutal; suffering is widespread and inevitable. People who are able to bounce back from adversity and remain positive and proactive in the face of challenges may be more likely to survive and thrive.
  
• Cooperation: During times of crisis, cooperation and collaboration among individuals and groups may be essential for survival. Those who are able to build strong networks of support and work together towards common goals may have a better chance of weathering the storm.

"The Call of the Wild" is a useful parable because these are the four fundamental characteristics Buck had that allowed him to survive and thrive in The Northland, whereas others perished. This is why Buck's evolution is such a useful roadmap for men who are motivated to develop themselves and get better at being a man. The Ghost Dogs have three explicit goals:

• Improve ourselves as individuals
• Surround ourselves with like-minded men who we trust and respect
• Create useful social networks and mutually-beneficial win-win relationships with other individuals and group 

In accomplishing these goals, we address and develop each of those four characteristics needed to survive social collapse. In essence, The Ghost Dogs are organized and structured in a way that assures we will survive and thrive as our society erodes. 

Skeptics and critics may claim my outlook and predictions are wrong; our society might be perfectly fine and our future is filled with muffins wrapped in rainbows. Maybe they're right. Maybe this is just misplaced paranoia. Maybe us modern-day Americans really have figured out how to maintain peace and prosperity indefinitely and we've successfully escaped the cycle that doomed every other human civilization. 

Maybe. 

 

We all have a choice. We can sit back and do nothing and hope our safe, cushy, existence lasts until the end of time. We can choose to believe our kids will be fine, and their kids and their kids' kids will be fine. We can keep working jobs we hate to buy shit we don't need to impress people we don't like. We can stay in bad relationships with partners we resent because they do not appreciate our sacrifices to raise kids who hate us. We can treat the heath problems caused by our sedentary lifestyles and gross obesity with the latest, greatest pharmaceuticals.  We can pass time sitting on the couch rooting for men who play games we wish we could play, or fight imaginary wars with our virtual friends to earn imaginary glory in the latest installment of Call of Duty. We can satisfy our primal sexual drive by jerking off to our favorite Pornhub channel. We can bury our loneliness and quiet desperation with drugs, alcohol, and weed. 

Or we can do the hard work of getting better at being a man. We can create a life of real adventure where we take real risks and earn the honor and respect of real men who we trust and respect in tribes bonded by a strong sense of brotherhood. We can choose to become stronger, more courageous, and develop our skills in manly pursuits that will be required in the near future. We can become the kind of man that would make our grandfathers proud. We can become the kind of man who can survive and thrive the coming collapse. We can become the kind of man we are destined to become. 

The choice is yours. If you're in that first group, I'm not interested in changing your mind. If you're not desperate to discover your innate, primal masculine self, you're not going to be motivated to do the hard work that discovery requires. You'd be wasting my time and you'd be wasting yours.

If you're in that second group, though, keep reading. You've found your tribe.

~Jason

***

"The Call of the Wild" Masculinity Parable Part Three

Read Part One here, and Part Two here. 

Chapter Four: Who Has Won Mastership

Connecting with Our Primal Masculinity

Buck proved to be an excellent leader, even better than Spitz. Under Buck’s leadership, the team set record paces for their runs through the frozen tundra of The Northland. Buck and his team were eventually sold and used to haul mail.

In this chapter, London describes Buck lying next to the fire after their daily run, dreaming back to the days at Judge Miller’s place, Toots and Ysabel, the Man in the Red Sweater, Curly, the fight with Spitz, and all the things he had eaten and would like to eat. Buck wasn’t homesick, though, the memories of his past were dim and distant, and had no power over him.

What were potent, though, were the images that came to him that were imprinted in his DNA. He would see himself sitting by a different fire in a different, distant time, where he sat alongside an ancient, hairy, primitive human. Buck was connecting with his ancestral past; a force that was increasingly pulling at his soul.

Modern men work the same way. The more we engage ourselves in manly endeavors, the more we connect with our instinctual past. The masculine gender role has existed since the dawn of time, and has allowed our species to survive. The blueprint for that survival through the millennia is the blueprint each of us has within.

When men start engaging in manly pursuits with other men, a fire is ignited that connects us with our fathers from generations past. The more we engage in such activities, the greater the fire grows. This connection with the past is our biological destiny.

Duty and Making Meaningful Contributions that Matter

Also in chapter four, we learn the fate of Dave, one of the dogs who had been with the team since Buck joined. Dave begins showing symptoms of an internal injury that spas his strength. The Scotch half-breed, the man who bought the dogs from François and Perrault, take Dave out of the traces to allow him to walk behind the sled to recover, if possible. But Dave cannot tolerate being separated from the team; his team.

“Dave resented being taken out, grunting and growling while the traces were unfastened, and whimpering broken-heartedly when he saw Sol-leks in the position he had held and served so long. For the pride of trace and trail was his, and, sick unto death, he could not bear that another dog should do his work.”

He tries running alongside the sleds in the deep snow, which goes about as well as expected. Despite falling repeatedly, yelping and whining in both pain and grief, Dave continues until the next stop. With his last bit of strength, Dave flounders past the sleds to his own, where he stands alongside Sol-leks. Dave chews through Sol-leks’ traces, then replaces the other dog in his rightful position.

Relenting, Dave was harnessed in again. Throughout the trip to the next camp, Dave fell several times, once even getting a leg caught under the sled. But he made it to the next camp. A place next to the fire was prepared where he slept that night.

In the morning, he was too weak to travel. Defiantly, Dave tried crawling to his team as they were being harnessed to the sled. He never made it. As his team pulled away down the trail, Dave’s mournful howling could be heard until they passed out of sight. The train of sleds stopped. The Scottish half-breed retraced his steps back towards the camp. A few moments later, a revolver shot rang out.

The sense of duty Dave felt towards his role as part of the team is the same sense of duty that has bonded men together, all working towards a goal, since men first inhabited the Earth. This is the foundation of the masculine desire to provide and protect for those we love. Would you be willing to pay the ultimate price, to sacrifice your life, for those you love?

That sense of duty is the sense of duty that fueled Dave’s desire to be a productive member of his team. It is what defined him, and refusing him his rightful role was tortuous to his soul. Dave died doing what he loved. The rest of us should be so lucky.

Chapter Five: The Toil of Trace and Trail

Hal, Charles, and Mercedes

This chapter begins with the dog teams arriving in Skaguay, the southernmost point of the trails leading north into the wild. In the five months since Buck arrived, his team had traveled 2,500 miles of hard pulling. His weight had dropped from 140 pounds down to 115 pounds. Every fiber of the dogs’ bodies were exhausted. The drivers and the dogs were preparing for a much-needed extended period of rest and recuperation.

But alas, rest wasn’t in the cards.

Four days after arriving, the dogs and their sled was bought by three Americans. Hal, a nineteen year old who carried a large knife and Colt revolver on his hip, Charles, a middle-aged man with weak and watery eyes, and Mercedes, Charles’ wife and Hal’s sister, like so many from The Southland, had arrived to find promises of gold-hued riches in the frozen tundra.

The dogs’ experience with the Americans started with them loading an impossibly-overloaded sled with countless material possessions that provided the material comforts of their soft, comfy existence in the civilized world. Pulling the load was an impossible task, especially for the exhausted team of dogs. The attempt to move the sled resulted in it tipping and spilling the contents up and down the street. Much to Mercedes’ chagrin and the amusement of onlookers, the Americans whittled their possessions by half, which was still too much. To compensate, they purchased six more dogs, for a total of fourteen. In their ignorance, the Americans did not understand a sled could carry enough food for fourteen dogs, even without the formidable load of useless material possessions.

Their fate was sealed before they left Skaguay.

This journey, at the hands of ignorant Southlanders, proved to be a comedy of errors. The original eight dogs were clearly exhausted. The six Southland dogs that were added proved to be worthless at pulling a sled and had appetites accustomed to the luxury of their Southland upbringing. The Americans started too late in the morning, took too much time taking down their camp, made too little progress on the trail, and stopped too early in the evening.

To compensate for their slow progress, Charles doubled the rations for the dogs, which didn’t remedy the problem. No amount of food could makeup for the exhaustion of the veteran dogs and incompetence of the new dogs. By the time they reached a quarter of their journey, they had consumed half of their food. Rations were cut to half, which caused all six of the new dogs to starve to death.

“Buck felt vaguely that there was no depending upon these two men and this woman. They did not know how to do anything, and as the days went by it became apparent they could not learn, They were slack in all things, without order of discipline, It took them half the night to pitch a slovenly camp and half the morning to break that camp and get the sled loaded in fashion so slovenly that for the rest of the day they were occupied in stopping and rearranging the load.”

There are two lessons to be learned from the incompetence of Hal, Charles, and Mercedes. First, the behaviors and attitudes of The Southland, when stripped of the safety and luxury of civilization, cannot survive. Second, material possessions have no place outside the comfort of The Southland.

To the first point, the fate that befell the trio is the same fate met by men who have never experienced real struggle and adversity, get thrust into more challenging situations, and fail to quickly learn. Worse, their own lack of preparation made them callous to the suffering of their dogs, for whom they relied upon for survival.

“Hal’s theory, which he practiced on others, was that one must get hardened. He had started out preaching it to his sister and brother-in-law. Failing there, he hammered it into the dogs with a club.”

How often do we see this scenario play out? Weak men acting like strong men, devoid of masculine virtues, demanding others toughen up without any recognition of the bitter irony of their own sad, weak constitution. Men like Hal exist because they give other weak men devoid of masculine virtues a surge of pride, a false pride that has not been earned or tested among other men of virtue.

The Law of Love and Fellowship makes men soft because the manly virtues of strength, honor, courage, mastery, and brotherhood are not necessary in that world. Men who have spent their entire existence in that cushy world have two choices - occasionally forego that comfort to build those masculine virtues, or develop the ability to learn and apply those virtues in an extremely short time under decidedly harsh conditions.

To the second point, the trio arrived in The Northland completely unprepared for the feeling of discomfort. They needed their tent, blankets, dishes, and other stuff that served as an anchor that slowed their progress to a crawl. They were unable to separate themselves from their possessions not only because of a need to avoid discomfort, but also because they had an emotional connection to stuff.

We see this same emotional connection to stuff among men in our modern world. That which we own defines us. We drive particular cars, dress in particular clothes, eat at particular restaurants, use particular brands of cell phones… modern men are really nothing more than brand whores. Why? Because the brands we use are a convenient way to signal the persona we want to communicate to the world.

Instead of working hard and earning status among men we respect, as is the way of men, we buy status symbols. Then we get caught up in maintaining these status symbols. The movie “Fight Club” offers up some superb wisdom on the matter:

“The things you own end up owning you.”

“Do you know what a duvet is? It’s a blanket. Just a blanket. Now why do guys like you and me know what a duvet is? Is this essential to our survival, in the hunter-gatherer sense of the word? No. What are we then? We are consumers. We’re the byproducts of a lifestyle obsession.”

“Man, I see in Fight Club the strongest and smartest men who’ve ever lived. I see all this potential, and I see squandering. Goddammit, an entire generation pumping gas, waiting tables—slaves with white collars. Advertising has us chasing cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don’t need. We’re the middle children of history, man: No purpose or place. We have no Great War. No Great Depression. Our Great War’s a spiritual war; our Great Depression is our lives. We’ve all been raised on television to believe that one day we’d all be millionaires, and movie gods, and rock stars. But we won’t. And we’re slowly learning that fact. And we’re very, very pissed off.”

The End of the Road for The Southlanders

Hal, Charles, and Mercedes’ demise is inevitable. The iciness of winter was giving way to the warmth and blossoming of life of spring. After running out of food and trading Hal’s pistol for a frozen horse hide to feed to the starving dogs, the trio reach John Thornton’s camp at White River. John Thornton, upon seeing the skeletons of the dogs that had dropped in place as soon as the sled stopped, offered a warning:

“The bottom’s likely to drop out at any moment. Only fools, with the blind luck of fools, could have made it. I’ll tell you straight, I wouldn’t risk my carcass on that ice for all the gold in Alaska.”

“That's because you’re not a fool, I suppose” Hal replied. “All the same, we’ll go on to Dawson.”

Hal uncoiled his whip and started cracking it on the backs of the dogs. One by one, the dogs gingerly got to their feet.

Except Buck.

Lash after lash of the whip did not move him. Hal exchanged the whip for the club. 

 

“He refused to stir. So greatly had he suffered, and so far gone was he, that the blows did not hurt much. And as they continued to fall upon him, the spark of life within flickered and went down. It was nearly out. He felt strangely numb. As though from a great distance, he was aware that he was being beaten. The last sensations of pain left him. He no longer felt anything, though very faintly he could hear the impact of the club upon his body. But it was no longer his body, it seemed so far away.”

It was at this point, having seen enough, John Thornton leapt to Buck’s defense. “If you strike that dog again, I’ll kill you.” Hal drew his hunting knife, which was summarily knocked from his hand by Thornton, who picked up the knife and cut Buck from the traces. 

 

In a spat of anger and realizing the nearly-dead Buck was of no use, the trio took off across the ice. A quarter mile away, Buck and John Thornton watched as the ice gave way and dogs and humans disappeared. 

~Jason

 

***