Earlier today, Donald Trump released a political ad on Truth Social which was filled with interspersed images of a snarling wolf, and in which he compared his political opponents to the outdated folklorist view of villainous wolves saying, “Like a pack of rabid wolves, they’ll attack.” The ad itself plays into a social misunderstanding of wolves that we’ve poked holes in countless times at this point.

As we delve deeper into this topic, let’s momentarily sidestep the political implications of Trump’s messaging and instead shine a light on the broader cultural and linguistic constructions surrounding wolves. This approach enables us to engage in a nuanced conversation about the role of language in perpetuating harmful myths and stereotypes about these misunderstood creatures.

To begin, let’s consider the semiotic weight of the wolf in our cultural narratives. Time and again, wolves are portrayed as the villains, the proverbial ‘big bad wolves’ lurking in the shadows of our fairy tales, waiting to pounce. This archetype, while deeply embedded in our collective consciousness, is a gross distortion of the true nature of wolves. Wolves are not rabid, unpredictable beasts, but social creatures with a complex hierarchy and a tight-knit pack structure. Unfortunately, such demonizing portrayals have a lasting impact on the perception of these animals, influencing policy and leading to irrational fear and unnecessary culling.

The language used to describe wolves also contributes to their vilification. Terms such as “snarling,” “predatory,” “ferocious”, and in this case, “rabid” – often employed in sensationalist media – paint wolves as malevolent entities rather than sentient beings living in harmony with their environment. This dichotomy of language use fuels the misguided belief that wolves are a danger to humans, although instances of wolf attacks on humans are extraordinarily rare.

Moreover, the metaphorical usage of wolves to describe adversaries or threats, as exemplified by Trump’s political ad, furthers the harmful narrative. When we label a group of people as a ‘pack of wolves,’ we are invoking not just the image of wolves, but the associated negative connotations. This metaphorical mapping not only reinforces the demonization of wolves but also leverages it for political gain. The result is a toxic blend of misrepresentation and manipulation that serves neither wolves nor the truth.

While the political implications of such language use are profound, let’s not forget the ecological repercussions. The demonization of wolves leads to policies that favor extermination over conservation, disrupting ecosystems where wolves play a crucial role as apex predators. This in turn impacts other wildlife and the overall health of the environment.

Moving forward, we must strive to reconstruct our language and narratives about wolves. We should promote language that respects their ecological role and social complexity, and challenge harmful myths and stereotypes. Let’s replace fear-based narratives with fact-based ones, and see wolves not as symbols of villainy, but as integral components of our world’s biodiversity.

It’s essential to recognize the power of language in shaping our attitudes toward wolves. When we allow harmful language and myths to persist, we not only fail to protect these majestic creatures but also perpetuate a culture of fear and misunderstanding. As advocates for wolf conservation, we must remain committed to challenging these harmful narratives, promoting truthful representations, and protecting wolves for generations to come.