Call me slow. Really slow. For most of my adult life, I've wondered what the attraction to bad boys are. Why would anyone see the explosively angry nature of a McCain, or the anti-intellectual nature of a W, or the spoiled "play by my own rules because my parents will get me out of any jambs" unreliability of either of them as leaders? Why does anybody find them attractive? We repeatedly promote narcissists and ne'er-do-wells into positions of power.
In the process of thinking about the Anglo-Saxon fixation with vampires for another writing project, and watching the new series True Blood, I have a theory. It is my hope that in understanding why people are drawn to these self-serving, reckless and often violent types that we can understand how to steer ourselves away from them for our own good. Want to explore this with me?
If we see vampire stories as allegories, paralleling something about human natures and dilemmas, then we might learn something about ourselves.
In True Blood, it is accepted that vampires exist. They can live off of synthetic blood and therefore are becoming recognized and are fighting for civil rights. Still, humans aren't sure if they can trust them. They have physical and mental powers that are frightening. Some of them have no desire to "mainstream" and deny their feral natures. We meet vampire personalities that range from those that attempt to be as civil as possible and those that, in rebellion, are ostentatiously brutal. Above all, humans don't understand vampires. What makes them tick? Are they inherently, irretrievably vicious and heartless? Why would any human take the risk of trusting a vampire?
So, vampires are the quintessential "bad boys". (There are female vampires, too, but I'm solely considering the bad boy archetype right now.)Yet some humans do decide to hang out with vampires. Our female protagonist may be falling in love with one.
As the series began, I wondered, what would really compel someone to take that level of risk? Then our protagonist, Sookie, is explained to us. She has a gift/curse. She can hear what everybody is thinking. It's an annoying capability. It certainly gives her a power over others, as they can't hide things from her. But it makes her different and people are wary of her because she's different. So, she puts out a lot of energy to block out the thoughts of those she befriends. Still, hearing the unspoken thoughts of human beings has given her more than just a glimpse into the depravity, hypocrisy and sheer stupidity of our race. More than anyone, she knows that you can't trust human beings, perhaps any more than you can trust vampires.
Still, she's more vulnerable to vampires given their enormous strength. And the likelihood of violence is much greater. The lack of trust, alone, would not be enough to blithely consider humans equal to vampires in terms of risk. She is fascinated by them, but still afraid of them. When she meets our lead vampire, Bill, though, he is magnetic. She's afraid, but she's compelled.
Two things turn out to be crucial to this attraction. First, she can't hear his thoughts. One of his powers his also neutralized with her. She's the only human he's ever met who is immune to the vampire ability to "glam" or mesmerize and therefore control humans. She's simply not susceptible. This is both a relief for each of them - as they don't have to exercise or submerge their powers with each other. It is also anxiety producing, as they are each used to having these tools of control. Now they have to build a relationship without them. They empathize with each other on this front and it creates a bond. (There is a lot to consider about people with "powers" being drawn to someone with different, but comparable powers, but that's not the crux of the matter for this discussion.)
It's the second point of magnetism that begins to explain how the McCain's and the Bush's and other bad boys achieve success. As we are socialized into civility, we become conflict averse. If you watch young children play, they have no compunction in saying to one another, "hey, that was mean!" or running over to grab a toy out of another child's hand. We train children to find "nicer" ways to express themselves or get their needs met. There are very good reasons for this. It's hard to get people to work towards mutual goals if they can't be considerate of one another.
But what happens when we are so civilized, so trained in the school of "if you don't have something good to say don't say anything at all" that we watch silently as angry or mean people treat someone poorly? What happens when no one stands up to bosses that yell? Or the boorish guy in the social group that makes lewd remarks about the women? What does a person look for in the world if no one has ever stood up for her?
Bad boys defy social protocols. While they're unpredictable and even violent, they are not conflict averse. They are not afraid to use whatever powers they have - physical, family connections, money - to realize their desires. If you've always felt vulnerable, with no protectors in your midst, this would be attractive. Compelling. Yes, he may be unpredictable and his willingness to use violence might be a bit scary, but if he's using that power to protect you then you just may feel safer than you ever have.
In True Blood, Bill saves Sookie's life when she is brutally attacked by a couple of thugs. He saves her life in a way that no human could have. Upon doing so, they are also deeply bonded. It creates a psychic linkage between them, whereupon he is acutely sensitive to her emotions and can be there instantaneously to protect her. It is clear that he would stop at nothing to do so. Who wouldn't love that umbrella of protection in a crazy, dangerous world?
McCain is known to be a volatile man. He used to box. He's a gambler and a drinker. In his very first political campaign he was willing to practically assault his debate opponent with something like, "hey, pal, I was a POW so just try to throw mud at me and watch me make you look like shit!" (those weren't the exact words, but it's the intention I felt when I heard them.) I imagine he can turn on the charm when he wants to, just as Bush can. But we know he's a liar. He's on video admitting it several times. There are many reports of his inordinately aggressive treatment of people in the Senate. Still, he's seen as a leader. His wife was willing to build a relationship with him based on a lie and knowing that he was treating his existing wife with great disrespect. How could she imagine that it would be any different with her?
So, is it possible that we keep promoting men like this to positions of power because we're afraid that the more honorable, civilized men wouldn't step in to protect us? Why would we think that? When did our definition of honor leave out the quality of chivalry? (something both men and women can express.)
Is Obama, with his "say it to my face" and his willingness to look McCain in the eye and tell him he's wrong, offering us a better protective archetype? I hope so. It's called the Advocate. Rather than the Warrior. We need advocates. They're more balanced. Because the thing about that bad boy umbrella of protection, is that it all seems fine when their warrior energy is aimed at others, but it perpetuates the presence of destructive energy in your world. And you can never trust that it won't some day be aimed at you.