Replies

It is a bit shocking, but Dame Goodall has just overturned years of effort to end the comparison of human beings to apes. If her logic applies to Mr. Trump, it also applies to Mr. Obama, and of course every other human male, regardless of their race, or the proximity of their homeland to the natural ranges of the chimpanzee.

Applying Dame Goodall's methodology to Mr. Obama, something I wouldn't have considered even remotely appropriate prior to Dame Goodall's decision to extend her behavior analysis to Mr. Trump, it seems that Mr. Obama shows more submissive traits than dominant traits. Some of his public gestures in meetings with other world leaders are similar to those used by submissive apes:

"A submissive chimpanzee lets the aggressor know that he or she is not a threat through non-threatening postures such as presenting their back, crouching and bowing in front of the threatening chimpanzee, or bobbing."

Source

Personally, I think that Dame Goodall's decision to use her expertise and renown as a scholar to justify applying characteristics of chimpanzee behavior to human beings in a particular, individualized sense shows a very unpleasant side of her thinking, and that of those who published her thoughts. Unfortunately, it has the effect of validating statements historically made that used comparisons between non-human primate behavior and human beings, and the organizations and individuals that made them. But, given her expertise and stature in the research community apparently that kind of analysis is now acceptable.