Self-Image and the Pecking Order

In any society in the higher-level animal kingdom, there is a natural hierarchy among the members, based on ability, skills, personality and (sorry, but it's true) gender. Because the phenomenon was first observed and studied in birds, it is often termed the pecking order.

It works like this. In the world of chickens, a bird pecks at any other bird to demonstrate dominance. In any group of, say, five chickens, there is one chicken who can peck at any other chicken, and the other will give in. This is the Number One chicken. There is another chicken who can freely peck at the three other chickens, but not Number One, because Number One will retailate. This is the Number Two chicken. Of course, there is one poor chicken, Number Five, that is pecked at by all the other chickens, has no other chicken to peck at, and is the bottom of the social scale.

Unfortunately, this concept rears its ugly head in human relations. It doesn’t have to be a bad thing. It just exists. On a basketball team, the weaker players feed the ball to the stronger players, and the team benefits. (It is up to the coaches and the stronger players to find the places where the weaker players can contribute their part, or the team becomes lopsided, loses cohesion, and ultimately fails.)

The problem with the pecking order is when it achieves exaggerated importance in the society, and especially in the individual’s self-image.

For example, in my PE classes, I play most games with homogeneous teams: some strong, some weak players on each team. However, I sometimes line the students up before dividing into teams and say, “Stronger players at this end of the line, weaker at that end, middles in the middle.”

Some people will be horrified at this, saying that it makes the weaker players feel inferior, and inflates the egos of the stronger players, and yada yada yada. However, I have always found that the children cheerfully, and mostly accurately, group themselves in the appropriate groups, because they know that they will be playing against others at their own ability level.

Note that this isn’t a social pecking order. It is a ranking by ability, and it is being used for practical purposes, not power purposes, and everybody benefits. The problems, especially in PE class, come when people get ranking by ability mixed up with social dominance.

Also, in this case they get to place themselves. If one of the middle players wants to work with the good players, he could put himself up near that end of the line. I sometimes move people “up” the line to challenge them, if I think they placed themselves with a weaker group (usually for social reasons).

The real problem comes when the pecking order gains too much importance in the self-image of the individual. It works like this:

Let’s say Mary is a very pretty little girl. She is always praised for being pretty. When she is young, Mary doesn’t know what pretty is. All she knows is that Mummy and Daddy think it’s wonderful when she…well, she isn't really sure. Since parental approval has great importance in any child’s life, Mary spends a great deal of effort figuring out what makes Mummy and Daddy so happy. She soon learns that if she is well-dressed and neat, and acts cute, they make a fuss over her. So she acts that way more and more.

However, as she grows up, she needs to develop her own self image. She needs to find ways of being proud of herself, not because of what Mummy and Daddy say, but because of what she knows herself as good and bad, right and wrong. If she is allowed to pass through this stage, still looking to Mummy and Daddy to tell her what is good, right, and pretty, she comes to depend on other people’s opinions too much, and have a lack in her own personal self -image.

This dependence on others for self-concept can lead to real problems. Because the child doesn’t really know what she did to achieve approval, as soon as another child shows up, she doesn’t know how to deal with that other child. She doesn’t know what the rules are, she can only see that other child as competition, in a game where she isn’t sure of the means to succeed. This creates an uncertain situation, and the other child is seen as the reason for the uncertainty. If Mary can find a way to demonstrate her superiority over the other child, then she feels better. So she spends her energy finding ways to demonstrate superiority over the other child. As she expands her social circle, she continues to learn how to exert dominance. She has discovered the pecking order.

Incidentally, when she thinks she’s too old to look to Mummy and Daddy for advice, she looks to her friends and to what she sees on TV, and what do we have? Presto! The teen fashion industry.

Another child, let’s call her Jane, who has developed her self-concept based on her own knowledge and abilities, will see other children differently. If placed with another child, she doesn't automatically see competition. If she does want adult attention, she knows what she can do. If she knows she had athletic ability, she will do athletic things. If she has learned that cooperation is good, she will try to cooperate with the other child. Poor Mary! All she can do is look pretty. Next thing you know, Mary will be pushing in front of Jane, perhaps roughly, so everyone can look at her. Then Mary gets in trouble, and she really doesn't know what's going on.

I do not explain any of this to children. However I do explain the pecking order. This is the part that really strikes a chord with the 9- to 12-year-olds.

The problem for a person who bases his self-concept on his place in the pecking order is that, like the chicken, he has to worry about maintaining it. He has to fight for his place, and, if everyone is like him, he has to realize that there is always a bunch below him fighting for his spot.

Face it, the bird who sits atop the pecking order is not a happy bird. He’s a bird always looking over his shoulder to see who is going to try to peck him off.

I get students to discuss how the pecking order works with friends. In general, people who are friends concern themselves very little with the pecking order. They have, through association, decided on what the order is, and they proceed to ignore it. Friends are comfortable with each other, because there is no social jostling. In fact, the pecking order between friends may reverse, depending on the activity. One may be braver, another may be more academic, another may be more athletic. Depending on the situation, a different person may be the leader at any different time. Even friends who have a strong imbalance, with one always being the acknowledged leader, are comfortable with each other, because they don’t have to be worrying about their places.

This is why three often becomes a crowd. It is easy to set a pecking order with two people. When you have three, the dynamics are three times as complicated. Not only are there more relationships to consider, but the possibility of using the power of the third person to swing against the other makes the pecking order more difficult to balance.

Psychologist Alfred Adler made some interesting observations about the pecking order in families. He postulated that the position in the family, relative to the other siblings, is so ingrained at an early age, that it shades the person’s social interactions for his whole life. An older child, who has grown up being the leader, will always be the leader, and does not feel comfortable if he is not the leader. The younger child, who has been the follower all his life, is happy being the follower, and will not fight so hard to become the leader. Don’t even ask about the middle child.

Again, this is not stuff you discuss with a nine-year-old. It’s enough for him to realize that, in some cases, people are doing things that make them feel more important than other people, and that usually this isn’t the best way for people to get along.

Also, when dealing with social bullies, bringing their tricks out in the open is a sure way to neutralize them. If you watch social bullies at work, you see that they are very aware that their manipulations are wrong, and they try to disguise their true motivation for what they are doing. A discussion of the pecking order makes them realize that they can't get away with this.

Next post: The Pecking Order and Being Cool