Memories of Testosterone

In response to my recent post (appearing here and at litbrit ) about the killing of the Republican brand, Lisa Simeone posted a comment quoting New York Times reader Mitch Luckett of Washington, who'd written a response to Maureen Dowd's latest column (got all that?!) Anyway, I felt this gentleman's words--chilling, articulate, and powerful--really got to the heart of the matter and deserved to be spotlighted. Herewith, the comment:

Bush is suffering from what I call, "memories of testosterone." I see it in many middle-aged friends of mine who were draft dodgers, AWOL and just plain cowards during the Vietnam war. As young men, they didn't use their testosterone when they had plenty of it and now, in some strange--but still safe--way are romanticizing combat and thereby recapturing the one way deemed certain in our society to prove their manhood. A manhood, I might add, that, with increasing age, gets further out of reach if abandoned in youth. For years my friends chided and poked fun at me because I was "stupid" enough to obey the draft law. That all stopped about the time we turned fifty. Then I began receiving curious, if not bizarre, invitations. One friend, who went AWOL and spent 5 years in Canada weaving tree bark into peace signs, called me up and tried to get me to join his Civil War Re-enactment brigade: "We get to wear uniforms and carry rifles and mock shoot the other side. It's great fun." His enthusiasm for war games would have been amusing had it not been so revealing. I declined, claiming gout. Another middle-aged "peace-neck" friend joined the NRA and started collecting WWI weapons, and still another became an apprentice blacksmith at a Washington Army installation that forged officers' swords. When the four of us get together we--that is they--tell bogus romantic war stories and encourage me to tell authentic romantic war stories. I know some authentic ones, but none romantic and authentic. I can't of course. Those of us that have been there got the romance kicked out of us in about ten seconds. My socializing with my post-fifty draft-dodgers is depressing. Much more so than when they used to mock me for going to Viet Nam. It's depressing as well because Bush reminds me of them--and vice versa. Could it be Bush attacked Iraq merely for memories of testosterone? To prove his manhood because he failed so miserably to do so when he was a young man. And worse, does he really believe he is doing our young military men and women a favor by starting this war? You know, could be. The only thing more powerful than testosterone itself is memories of testosterone. And that's because the person with memories of testosterone has the political power to go along with it. Bang! Bang! You're dead. I'm finally a man. Better late than never.

-- Mitch Luckett

I've heard many an admirable attempt to explain the inexplicable when it comes to Dear Leader's actions.  This one shouts Eureka.

Comments

[Sir Charles]

The Republican Party is inundated with this kind of fake machismo.

However, Bush's statement was really off the charts in this regard -- the absolute absence of self-awareness, not to mention the preposterous romanticization of war, something that he, of course, moved heaven and earth to avoid.

[Tom]

Eureka. What a great find.

I'd like to see someone analyze that whole "memories of testosterone" phenomenon a bit further. I'm young now, with no intention of joining the military, and I'd like to hope that when I'm old I will not start acting like a militaristic jackass -- especially not if I'm with someone who has actually fought in a war.

[low-tech cyclist]

As one who was against the Vietnam War when young, I've not observed this phenomenon of former peaceniks turning weapons and reenactment enthusiasts. I'd like to have more than one man's anecdotes as evidence before regarding it as real.

I'm more worried about the pro-war types who avoided fighting in the wars of their time, from Cheney and Bush on down.

It's crazy that a man with as many years behind him as Bush has, could hold onto the notion that there's anything romantic about war. Even a 'good' war such as WWII or the American Revolution is a bloody mess, to be avoided unless there's no rational alternative.

I remember visiting the Yorktown battlefield with a friend when I was in my early 30s. One of the exhibits mentioned that the Americans 'softened up' a British defensive position for some hours before trying to overtake it. What it didn't say, but that my friend and I discussed, was that 'softening up' meant raining artillery fire down on the position, killing and wounding enough men, and striking fear into the hearts of enough others, so that the defenders wouldn't have much fight left in them.

That's what war is about: people getting blown up. It's hard to romanticize that, once it's wormed its way into your awareness. I can understand why Mitch Luckett is depressed by his friends' requests for anecdotes that are both authentic and romantic. That our President thinks war is romantic tells me that he's never gotten past adolescence.

[litbrit]

ltc, I agree--it's the pro-war types who previously avoided it that make me nervous ("War for thee but not for me!")

I don't think Mr. Luckett was saying all people who were against war in their youth will, due to testosterone memories, later turn into hawks in their middle years. Rather, I think he was pointing to some of the ones who do, and looking at their unusual interest in romanticizing war and the irony of same. And positing that Bush, with his unparalleled access to power and battle by proxy, is the most dangerous version of such romanticizers.

[Lisa Simeone]

I'm with litbrit on this. Luckett was just drawing a comparison between his own experiences and the fantasies of Bush. He wasn't trying to claim some kind of trend or national former-peacenik-now-warmonger psychosis.

[BillCinSD]

But aren't the pro-war types who avoided war the people that are most likely to be suffering from memories of testosterone? thus the point of using Luckett's words in this context isn't about specifically liberal draft dodgers, but more about the Bush's and Cheney's