Dominance vs. Aggression: I’d Rather Face a Gorilla than a Chimp in a “Fight”
If you can’t tell already, I’m utterly fascinated by apes and monkeys. I don’t know if I’ll ever run out of content to write about so long as I can call upon my fellow primate brethren for writing content. Today, we’re going to take a look at some of the key behavioral differences between gorillas and chimpanzees to gain a better understanding of why dominance is not aggression.
Dominance & Aggression
Dominance is sometime confused with aggression, which isn’t to say that they are entirely substituted for each other frequently, but rather that their mutual inclusivity is viewed as more salient than their exclusive cases. In other words, their overlap may sometimes be focused on too much. You might encounter this type of confusion while listening to podcasts discussing masculinity, alpha/beta males (Don’t try to explain to me that alpha and beta males don’t exist, you beta!), and topics of that nature. I’m sure that Joe Rogan’s podcast is an absolute reservoir of that content.
So let’s define the two terms to clear up any potential confusions. Denotations come first (supplied by Google definitions; fun fact, those definitions are provided by Oxford).
Dominance — power and influence over others
Aggression — hostile or violent behavior or attitudes toward another; readiness to attack or confront
These are pretty straightforward definitions, but what can be derived from considering their larger implications from a connotational standpoint? The first idea that comes to mind is a potential connection between the definitions themselves. More specifically, the wording of dominance’s definition can certainly imply a degree of aggression. The “power” that one group or person can hold, especially “over” others, denoting an advantageous position (think of it physically, like having the high ground in a battle) can make one think thoughts of aggression, but perhaps wrongly so. Digging into the latter definition may clear this up.
Why would someone, or something engage in “hostile or violent behavior” towards others of its kind? Is it because the individual in question is being threatened? If so, by what? Consider the latter portion of this definition. Why is the subject in question have a certain “readiness to attack?” We can think of an “attack” like an event that occurs between predator and prey, but that’s not so accurate. When a cheetah explodes out of its pounce after a gazelle, it is only “aggressive” for so long. When the cheetah is not hunting, it is not aggressive, and would most likely run away from a threat, like a human or a tourist jeep (cheetahs are quite small and much weaker than other big cats; their explosive and sudden speed is their only trump card).
Fun fact: Cheetahs are the only big cat that cannot roar. They can only purr.
Instead, I propose the idea that aggression implies a degree of insecurity. Animals that engage in hostile behavior consistently and not just for means of catching food, but rather for the function of survival in a defensive sense, are those that are truly aggressive. Enter the chimpanzee.
Chimpanzees
The chimpanzee (pan troglodytes), or simply chimp, is a species of great ape native to Africa. They are, genetically, our closest living relatives, sharing roughly 99% of the same DNA. Adult chimpanzees stand at an average of 150 cm and weigh anywhere between 40–70 kg for males and between 27–50 kg for females. Although they are smaller than humans on average, they have incredible strength: In chimp attacks on people, humans have had their fingers, faces, genitals, etc. completely torn off by chimps. Though they aren’t trained to throw a proper punch, they don’t need to. Their absurd strength enables them to simply grab parts of your body and rip them off. And if they get their mandibles on you, you’re almost certainly dead. I could go on for hours about the insane strength that chimps hold, but what I’m more concerned about here is their behavior, or consistently hostile behavior, to be more precise.
To take a closer look at the hostility of chimps, let’s consider this question: Why do chimps make bad pets? Well, chimps make bad pets because they are wild animals. That goes for any species. Keeping a large, non-domesticated animal in your home always runs some type of risk. But what about chimps specifically? Chimps are incredibly violent — and a lot of the time, too. Why is this?
Here’s a fun fact: Chimps and humans are the only two known species that wage organized acts of aggression against each other. That’s right — humans are not the only animals that are capable of warfare; we share this violent characteristic with our closest relatives. Although warfare used to be considered a recent cultural “innovation” in humans, there’s now little doubt that the causation of warfare in humans is actually due to multiple factors, including biological ones.
Essentially, chimps are innately aggressive and violent, shown in their societal structure that has them killing each other for land, not unlike human history. There are numerous records of wars being waged between chimp troops, with battles resulting in dozens of dead chimps at a time. To top it all off, chimps are actually meat-eaters, despite what you (and scientists used to) think.
In this documentary clip, narrated by the legendary David Attenborough, a troop of chimps are shown hunting a colobus monkey. They skillfully and purposefully trap the monkey until they can grab it, and then literally tear the monkey apart (while it’s alive) to eat it. They end up cleaning out the bones, with one shot even showing a chimpanzee searching for scraps of meat in the monkey’s skull.
Chimps have also shown cannibalistic behavior, even eating babies of their own kind. Chimps are not the nicest creatures, to say the least.
But we can’t forget the original proposition I brought forth: Chimps are aggressive partly due to some type of insecurity. In some sense, aggression is defined by a type of fear. Why else would you fight if not incited by fear — perhaps some fear that you are small, vulnerable, and must fight and kill for your life? This will be made a bit more clear when we discuss the…
Gorilla
The eastern gorilla (Gorilla beringei) or western gorilla (Gorilla gorilla) is currently the largest living primate on Earth. Their diet is herbivorous, consisting mainly of leaves, stems, and shoots of indigenous African plants. Gorillas can reach standing heights between 1.25 and 1.8 meters, weights between 100 and 270 kg, and impressive wingspans up to 2.6 meters (these numbers all vary based on subspecies and sex). Gorillas are very powerful, reaching levels of strength up to 8 or 9 times as much as humans (chimps are roughly 1.5 to 2 times as strong as humans). Behaviorally, however, gorillas are far more peaceful than chimpanzees, fighting only when provoked, and seldom fighting within their own troops. The silverback, or the dominant male of the troop, will occasionally fight another male trying to assert dominance or mate with one of his females, but not to the extent of either individual incurring injuries. Why is this the case?
Let’s get back to the difference between aggression and dominance. While gorillas are much larger and stronger than chimpanzees, they are far less prone to violence. More precisely, that is the exact reason that gorillas are so peaceful. Gorillas know that they are at the top of the dominance hierarchy when it comes to primates. They may be threatened when seeing human tourists or chimpanzees crossing their territory, but won’t immediately resort to violence. Of course, if you decide to ululate, flail your arms wildly, and sprint towards the silverback of a gorilla troop, you will probably be attacked. This case is quite extreme, however, and most of the time, when humans encounter gorillas in the wild, the interaction is quite peaceful. If you get too close to a gorilla troop, the silverback may perform a false charge, or warning charge at you, but it means you no harm. This warning charge is essentially the silverback saying, “I know I can win in a fight. Leave now, before you get hurt.” Here’s a video showcasing this (the charge occurs at the start):
Here’s another video showing a peaceful encounter with a silverback gorilla:
The grunting noises that the silverback performs are indicative of his lack of aggression, contrary to what they might seem like. The people are keeping their heads down to not only avoid eye contact (which the gorilla would interpret as a challenge), and to show their submission. Seeing these submissive humans as non-threats, the silverback goes on with his day, without harming any of them.
The “Fight”
Now that we’ve gone over the differences between the dominant gorilla and the aggressive chimpanzee (chad gorilla vs. virgin chimp, if you will), let’s set the hypothetical “fight” scenario.
You’re in a small, square room, with no objects in it. To walk from one side of the room to the other, it only takes about 5 seconds. There is a locked door, which can only be opened from the outside. After being in the room for 5 minutes, you will be set free. Also in the room is a great ape. In one scenario, it’s a full-grown, male chimp. In the other, it’s a full-grown silverback gorilla. You get to pick the scenario. Which do you choose?
Well, as I’ve already implied in the title of this blog post, I’d much rather take the gorilla. Under the assumption that the gorilla isn’t on any drugs that would make him more violent, and that he is already comfortable with the room, there is a very high chance you can avoid conflict altogether. With the chimp, however, there is a much greater chance that he will perceive you as a threat right away. Here’s what may happen in each of the scenarios:
In the case of the gorilla, you should immediately turn your head down, facing the ground. Avoid eye contact and make yourself as small as possible by crouching or sitting on the ground. You may even want to turn your hands upwards to show that you mean no harm (don’t make any sudden movements though). For no reason should you reach out to touch the gorilla. He may interpret this as a challenge or attempt to threaten him. During the 5 minutes, he will likely walk over to you, smell you, and examine your clothing. After that short introduction, he will keep a close eye on you. And that’s it. 5 minutes pass without conflict, at least, hopefully.
If the gorilla does decide to attack, you are dead. You have no weapons, are pathetically weak compared to him, and lack the wild instinct that he has, which provides him with additional strength and fighting prowess. This scenario is quite unlikely, unless you decide to go against the aforementioned precautions or even go the extent of beating your own chest like an ape (both in the derogatory and scientific sense).
In the case of the chimp, you should take similar precautions. Make yourself small, avoid eye contact, etc. It might be more unwise to extend your hand palm-up, however, as that makes your fingers vulnerable to the chimp’s jaws, or even their vice-like grip. Chimpanzees have been known to tear fingers off in the blink of an eye. Smiling in primates is a sign of submission, so that’s another option to show your peaceful intentions, but at the same time, it may seem like you are baring your fangs, ready for a fight. You’d also have to face the chimp to show your teeth, and that in itself could be perceived as a threat. It would probably be safest to stay small and look away.
Let’s say that you aren’t able to avoid conflict with the chimp. Unlike the case with the silverback, you actually stand a chance of winning the fight. It’s a very slim chance, but it’s there. I’m no combat expert nor am I an expert on great apes, but I can proffer some advice. First of all, realize this: You are weaker. You are slower. You are in almost every singe way, more incompetent than the chimp. You do have a massive brain, however, and on top of that, some of the most well-developed lower body muscles of all apes. Brains and legs — that’s the name of the game to play in a fight with a chimpanzee.
So why shouldn’t you use your arms? Well, it’s not that you shouldn’t use your arms, but rather that you shouldn’t forget to utilize your legs. The upper body strength of a chimpanzee completely dwarfs your upper body strength (even if you are an especially strong individual), and as mentioned earlier with the gorilla, this chimpanzee is a wild animal. It’s going to have wild animal instincts that lend it further strength and ability to fight. Have you ever noticed how it’s much easier to lift weights with your legs rather than your upper body? Consider the leg press machine at your gym. The weight usually goes up to around 200 kg (~400 lb), and most young, healthy individuals can perform a single rep of that heaviest weight. I know I can, and I don’t spend nearly enough time exercising my legs as I should. Meanwhile, I can barely bench press a little over 1 plate (total of 135 lbs, 61 kg or so), and I actually occasionally exercise my upper body. Though I don’t know if our legs are necessarily stronger than a chimpanzee’s, I do know that our upper bodies are pathetically weak compared to theirs.
Another reason to use your legs to defend yourself against a chimp beyond their power is the fact that they are far less vulnerable to damage or injury via the chimp. If you throw punches at the chimp, you’re essentially extending your hands and asking to have your fingers torn off. Even if you think, “Well, I have my fingers balled up into fists; my fingers are safe,” think again. Chimps are incredibly powerful and can most definitely pry your hands open.
As for the “brains” part of the strategy, just don’t forget that you are much, much smarter than the chimp. You’re able to throw proper punches, analyze fighting patterns, etc. In the end, this still won’t matter much. Pure power, speed, and frenzy that a wild animal is sent into during a fight results in a significant fighting gap that can’t be closed with intelligence. Still don’t believe me? Consider this story about Peter Lumetta:
“This Alaskan gemologist wrote a 2011 blog post about wrestling a 125-lb. chimpanzee in the summer of 1965 — and wrestling with his conscience afterward. He’d gone to a county fair, figuring ‘it was a good place to pick up some chicks.’ A carnie offered him a couple bucks to fight the chimp. Lumetta, then a six-foot, 220-lb. college football player, assumed it’d be an easy victory.
‘I gave him a direct hit to his chest which sent him into a frenzy of screaming and swinging,’ Lumetta recalled, and the chimp ‘knocked me to the floor of the cage and proceeded to jump up and down on my back…he threw me across the cage with his feet!’ (Looking back at the incident, Lumetta — who died earlier this year — felt the sideshow attraction ‘took advantage of our poor animal brethren. I participated in doing just that.’)”
If a 125 lb chimpanzee can throw a 220 lb man with his feet, then count me out. I almost certainly stand no chance of winning. And considering that I have a much lower chance of avoiding conflict with the gorilla over the chimp, it’s a no-brainer. I would much rather be cooped up with the gorilla than the chimp. This decision is also a piece of advice for you: If you have to strive for one, make it dominance, not aggression.
Sources
https://www.mtv.com/news/1865937/men-fought-apes/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gorilla
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimpanzee
https://www.livescience.com/8316-chimpanzee-gangs-kill-land.html
https://www.livescience.com/47885-chimpanzee-aggression-evolution.html
