by: josie makkink
“What would you do if there were no men in the world for a day?” was a question posed by East Coast Radio station last year to the South African public. A depressing, yet not unsurprising, majority called in to respond “I would feel much safer.” How do we explain high rates of male violence and aggression? Introducing everyone’s usual suspect: testosterone.
Testosterone has had a bad reputation over time. Testosterone is the hormonal culprit behind ‘toxic masculinity’: it generates aggressive, dominant and power-seeking behaviour in men. Think of an image of ‘too much testosterone’ and you’ll probably end up imagining a burly, impulsive gym bunny with wildly skew nose from all the brawls he’s proud to have been in.
But neuroscientific research shows that testosterone may not be to blame here. Werner Bohmke, a biological psychology lecturer at Rhodes University, says that “testosterone is perceived negatively because of the tendency we have to want to reduce complex human behaviours like aggression and violence to simple and unitary explanations”, (cue gym bunny). This suggests the need for a more complex, deeper understanding of both testosterone and masculinity.
Myth number one: Testosterone creates aggression.
Studies have shown a link between aggressive behaviour and a rise in testosterone. However, aggression stimulates the production of testosterone. This leads us back to the age-old question: Which came first, the chicken or the egg? The testosterone or the aggression? Scientists then asked the question of whether testosterone levels can predict the degree of aggression in people. The answer: no. In fact, British endocrinologist John Archer says that “there is a weak and inconsistent association between testosterone levels and aggression in human adults”. Astonishingly, testosterone does not create aggression, it only exacerbates pre-existing tendencies towards aggression.
Myth number two: Testosterone’s link to rape culture
Male aggression and sexual violence are inseparable. Bohmke explains that men's aggression is a part of the cultural conditions that make forms of gender-based violence possible. However, testosterone again may not be guilty here, but rather South Africa’s problematic socialisation of young men.
A renowned neuroscientist, Robert Sapolsky, discusses an incredibly interesting study in his book Behave. The study was performed on victims of chemical castration, the legal punishment for sex offenders in some countries and states, and shows that the inhibition of testosterone production does not decrease the rates of re-offense. Sex crimes that are motivated by aggression, anger and power are a function of social learning and have no link to biological inclinations. This is supported by Scott Mathie, a first year Rhodes student, who says that male aggression associated with rape culture is due to a sense of entitlement which comes with being “a man”.
Francis Makkink, a third year Rhodes student, says he believes that “aggression is partly driven by the urge to control, which is what rape essentially boils down to on a base level”. In light of Rhodes’ recent campaigns against rape culture, understanding what drives people to rape becomes an important tool in preventing it. Hunger for control and a sense of male entitlement promote male aggression, and appear to be defining elements of rape culture.
Mind-blowing research: Testosterone can promote generosity and pro-sociality. Neuroscientific research argues that testosterone produces whatever behaviour is necessary to maintain status – even if it requires someone to be kind. Christoph Eisenegger and Ernst Fehr, University of Zurich, produced a study that showed this. They used a game that involved splitting money between two men. One would make an offer, which the other could either accept, or reject, which would leave both with nothing. The more offers a man could have others accept, the greater his social status. When administered with testosterone beforehand, men made more generous offers.
Further studies discussed in Behave show that increasing levels of testosterone decreased cheating in a game where pride was based on honesty. In games where men could make public contributions to all team members, extra testosterone caused men to give away more money. Given a context where maintaining a high social status requires men to act more generous, prosocial and generally decent, testosterone serves to boost those qualities.
Evidently, the actions of testosterone have much more to do with social conditioning than with simply intensifying aggression. Bohmke says that the “naturalisation of, and social value that is attached to, displays of aggressive behaviour by men becomes part of the social and cultural background” against which young boys are socialised. He mentions that popular entertainment “glamourises violence” and promotes the popularity of sports stars and successful entrepreneurs who compete aggressively to maintain their wealth and social status.
Makkink says that a culture of male aggression and dominance is particularly prevalent at South African boys’ high schools. He describes how they “preach a hyper-masculine culture” which is most obviously seen in the “God-like treatment” of first team rugby players. Two renowned South Africans, Wilber Smith and Elon Musk, refuse to return to their respective high schools. Wilber Smith was severely bullied at one of South Africa’s most prestigious schools, Michaelhouse. Elon Musk was hospitalised after being beaten and thrown down the stairs at Bryanston High in Johannesburg. His experience at Pretoria Boys’ High did not seem to be much more pleasant. The school contacted him after his financial success, asking for a donation for a stadium. He agreed, but only on the condition that they never contact him again.
Mathie says that male aggression has “everything to do with social constructs” and feels that aggression is rewarded too often in South African society. He personally cannot express himself as much as he would like to because sensitive, emotional men are seen as weak. Jonah Bishof, also a Rhodes student, agreed. He says that expressing sensitivities puts men’s masculinity in jeopardy, and believes that social expectations such as these generate male aggression as opposed to biology.
Bohmke warns that the “biologisation of social behaviours can contribute to the naturalisation of these behaviours, to the extent that we begin to see phenomena like aggression and violence as innate, or inherent, and therefore inevitable”. He explains that it is imperative to challenge this simplification, and address the significant changes needed in social learning and the perception of ideal masculinity. Male aggression and violence are not a biological inevitability, but are behaviours shaped by the problematic values of our society.
Finally, in the wise words of Sapolsky, “In our world riddled with male violence, the problem isn’t that testosterone can increase levels of aggression. The problem is the frequency with which we reward aggression.” Perhaps if we re-defined our ideas of masculinity, testosterone would generate generations of kind, decent men.
periodt.
Comments