When Men in Groups was first published in l969, the New York Times daily critic titled his review "The Disturbing Rediscovery of the Obvious." What was so obvious was male bonding, a phrase that entered the language. The links between males in groups Tiger describes extend through many other primate species, through our evolution as hunters/gatherers, and cross-culturally. Male bonding characteries human groups as varied as the Vatican Council, the New York Yankees, the Elks and Masons the secret societies of Sierra Leone and Kenya.The power of Tiger's book is its identification of the powerful links between men and the impact of females and families on essentially male groups.
While the worldhas changed much, the argument of the book and its new introduction by the author suggest that a species-specific pattern ofmale bonding continues to be part of the human default system. Perhaps one day concrete evidence of its location will emerge from the startling work on the human genome, just as the elaborate and consequential sex differences to which Men in Groups drew such pioneering attention have already become part of the common wisdom. Meanwhile, Men in Groups remains a measured andresponsiblebut intrepid inspection of a major aspect of human social organiation and personal behavior. The book was controversial when it first appeared, and often foolishly and unduly scorned. But ithas remained a fundamental contribution to the emerging synthesis between the social and natural sciences.
"The most creative contribution to the social sciences since David Riesman's The Lonely Crowd."--Robert Ardrey, Life Magaine
"[Tiger's] enquiry into male bonding is an important step towards the possibility of discovering a genuine human dimorphism"--James Hamilton-Paterson, New Statesman
"The implications of Men in Groups are manifold. We should all be grateful to Dr. Tiger for drawing our attention to a neglected aspect of human behavior."--Anthony Storr, Times (London)
Lionel Tiger is the Charles Darwin Professor of Anthropology at Rutgers University. He is the author of The Decline of Males, Optimism, The Pursuit of Pleasure, and, with Robin Fox, The Imperial Animal, available from Transaction.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Book Description
Editorial Reviews
About the Author
Lionel Tiger is Charles Darwin Professor of Anthropology at Rutgers University. He is the author of The Decline of Males,Optimism,The Pursuit of Pleasure,China’s Food,The Manufacture of Evil, Men in Groups, and The Imperial Animal. In addition, he is a regular contributor to both Psychology Today and The New York Times. He is the series editor of Evolutionary Foundations of Human Behaviorfor Transaction Publishers.
--This text refers to the Paperback edition.
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
More About the Author
Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.
Customer Reviews
|
Share your thoughts with other customers:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
5 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Psychological Masterpiece,
By
Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: Men in Groups (Paperback)
This work is a sensational read that will appeal to anybody who does not think the words "male" and "men" are insults. It reads better a second time than the first.
14 of 19 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Underrated,
By Jack Malebranche (Portland, OR) - See all my reviews
This review is from: Men in Groups (Paperback)
I just finished reading a first edition hardcover of this book, which is believed to be responsible for popularizing the phrase "male bonding" which is widely in use to this day. A book with that sort of lasting influence could hardly be "obsolete," as another reader suggested.
Actually, some of Tiger's suggestions seem fresh and relevant, especially in light of recent trends that take another look at long buried, "dangerous" ideas like "Human Universals." (Notably referenced in Steven Pinker's excellent The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature) Current thinking on chimpanzee social structure is irrelevant to the ideas presented in this book. The key idea is here is that men seem to gain some sort of sense of well-being from male-male bonding and that male bonding seems to center around aggression (which Tiger defines broadly, not only in terms of violence but of seeking mastery of something--where violence is but one possible outcome of aggression). That aggression can be real or simulated. So this idea, in an age where cooperative online gaming (a new but highly male interest), ESPN, UFC and the movie 300 are all such popular points of reference for young , straight men, it actually seems that Tiger was actually more correct than he wished to be. Male bonding, and aggression, ARE part of human nature, and they can't necessarily be suppressed or rendered impotent despite the best intentions of "positivists." He was correct that male bonding needs to be accommodated in our plans for our species, and I would add, in a productive and positive way. Because young men will seek out manly identity and bonding from those who offer it--be they Boy Scouts or gangs. Old school feminists can continue to put their hands over their ears and wish human nature away, but it ain't going anywhere. Not completely. Highly recommended.
4 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Dealing with the obvious,
By Geoff Puterbaugh (Chiang Mai, T. Suthep, A. Muang Thailand) - See all my reviews
Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: Men in Groups (Paperback)
The condensed edition of this book: "Men function well, in teams, and women do not." You might go on to add that men "naturally" do this.
I suspect that there must be something biological, or genetic, in this obvious truth. Who knows? But I have heard curses from men who are coaching teams of women (soccer, basketball, etc.): "They just don't GET IT!" The reviewer who claims that the book is "obsolete," in my opinion, has a highly-inflated idea of human flexibility. Nevertheless, although this is a "ground-breaking" book, I find that it has aged, and it has not aged well. I don't know whether Lionel Tiger was simply too lazy to attempt a revision of this book, or whether his mind has gone to sleep over the last fifty years. Whatever: there are false notes struck on almost every page, and they are mostly political false notes. An example would be Lionel Tiger smugly asserting that racial segregation in America was due to whites not wanting to live with blacks. It does not even seem to occur to him that there is another side of the coin: that blacks do not want to live with whites. Even more incredible (for Tiger) is the concept that this might be a pretty good way to arrange life: whites and blacks do not necessarily live cheek-by-jowl, but perhaps in adjoining suburbs, where they have softball games on the weekends. OK, the whites probably lose the softball games most of the time, but why is this sort of living pattern assumed to be unthinkable? Another example is Tiger's feminism: he actively wants more women participating in politics. ("Why?" does not seem to occur to him.) He confesses that the political strength of men in groups is going to make realizing that goal very difficult, and therefore *profound political changes might be necessary to achieve this goal.* Making "profound political changes" to achieve some (perhaps imaginary) goal is actually an extremely dangerous idea, and I suspect that its time is very nearly over. A lot of important data is gathered here. I don't think it's well organized, but it is at least *gathered.* But I don't think any of this changes the fact that men naturally tend to form self-selected teams. If you have a social unit with fifteen guys in it, perhaps seven or eight will form themselves into a team. They will probably do it (in Western society) by trading insults (in person or over the Internet). Very often, a guy's "mates" are among the most important things in his life. An entrepreneur in New Zealand; a college boy in Chiang Mai; a Burmese refugee who has a pack of at least twenty friends --- find me a woman who operates like these guys. :-) Why do we Western folks need an entire book to document the obvious? Search me!
Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
|
|
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Suggested Tags from Similar Products(What's this?)Be the first one to add a relevant tag (keyword that's strongly related to this product).
|
Sell a Digital Version of This Book in the Kindle Store
If you are a publisher or author and hold the digital rights to a book, you can sell a digital version of it in our Kindle Store.
Learn more
