Presidential Debates

While watching – leaning forward, biting fingernails – the recent presidential debates, it occurred to me that what this tradition had become was an aristocratic boxing match.  Maybe society, I pondered for days after the second debate, had found another way to separate the haves from the have nots.  Physical boxing seems to be considered fitting for those with less income and education, and verbal sparring reserved for the upper crust.

Hostility and one-upmanship, of course, control both, and we can see it more easily in a boxing match, from the fierce eyes to the swinging fists.  Outside of the ring, boxing has morphed into shootouts – and jail time.  Even in St. Croix, we’re seeing drive-by shootings and escalating imprisonment of young black men.  Recent research has shown that levels of testosterone are much higher among male prisoners than the general population.

However, nature doesn’t discriminate.  Educated people also have a need to compete and dominate.  (Notice I’m being politically correct by not saying ‘men.’)  And one of the ways they’ve devised to channel that need is through debating, which they’re trained to do in the best schools.  You have to be respectful, they’re told, but let that animosity flow.

Take the second presidential debate between President Obama and Governor Romney.  There was no lack of adrenalin in both men, told by their pacing and inability to sit on their stools for more than a few seconds.  But the testosterone began to show while they were directing verbal jabs at each other, raising their voices, demanding more time to finish their thoughts, throwing their free arm out at their opponent.  The only thing that kept them from taking a swing or pulling out a gun was their training. 

But the reality is that they were doing what men (there, I’ve said it) have been doing for a long time, just doing it the gentleman’s way.  They were boxing.