The alpha-male is back?

Arsenal were playing last weekend and the star of the show was Theo Walcott. He scored the goal that gave Arsenal the lead and delivered a couple of crosses that on any other day would have been assists. And yet, it wasn't the quality of his football that won him praise but a reaction to an entirely fair tackle on him. Theo jumped up and, as aggressively as he could [which between you and me won't scare a fly], confronted the offender who was quite literally twice his size. Even Arsene Wenger extolled praise on his protégé: "Theo is not nice. He is polite!"

A few weeks ago the Observer came out with a huge story: Gordon Brown was reprimanded by the head of the Civil Service after consistently bullying No. 10 staff. "That's it" I thought. "This is the last nail in Labour's coffin. Not even a shred of hope of winning the election". But no. Rather than condemn the bully, the question raised by political analysts was: "who would you rather have as Prime Minister, the bully or the bullied?" Naturally, they thought the answer would be the former. As if everyone would prefer the bully. As if these are the only two options. I'd rather have neither. Amazingly, within days, Labour's deficit in the polls virtually vanished.

So how does one explain this? The natural conclusion is: the animal in us has re-emerged. The alpha-male is back!

Or is it? Well, sort of. Would we condone Theo's behaviour if he wasn't the slight boy that he is? Is it a coincidence that the bullying Gordon was exposed right after he cried talking about his baby dying in his hands? Would we approve of Gordon Ramsey's aggression if he wasn't so passionate about his admittedly girly profession and would we warm to Tony Soprano if he didn't spill his guts out (metaphorically Tony, relax) to his therapist? I dare think not. It's not really the alpha-male that we want. We want the alpha-metro-sexual!