people

Men Without Chests

Advisor to Men Leave a comment

 

MEN WITHOUT CHESTS
In 1943, at the height of World War II, C. S. Lewis published The Abolition of Man and issued a prophetic warning. A culture obsessed with being nice, tolerant, and emotionally agreeable, he argued, would not become more humane. Its men would become hollow, manipulable, and ultimately dangerous. He called them “men without chests.”

By this he meant people who still possess intellect and appetite, the head and the belly, but lack the chest, the trained moral instincts making courage, honor, loyalty, and restraint possible.

The chest is not sentimentality. It is disciplined emotion aligned with defensible values. It is the part of a man that allows him to recognize and act in alignment with what is right, even under pressure, without needing permission or consensus.

Lewis’s argument was brutally simple. If you debunk inherited moral law, including the accumulated understanding of right and wrong handed down through civilization, mock tradition, and flatten all values in the name of tolerance, you do not encourage free thinkers.

Instead, you produce people governable by fear and approval, who are easily shaped by bureaucracies, ideologies, and emotionally manipulative personalities, in the absence of an embodied moral structure and the capacity to say no.

These are people who can calculate endlessly, explain everything, and justify anything, but who cannot stand, refuse, or sacrifice. Compassion that is detached from hierarchy and moral training becomes cruelty because values and responsibilities are not interchangeable. Some harms must be tolerated to prevent greater ones, not all suffering is equal, and a culture that rewards weakness while punishing strength produces chaos rather than care.

When nothing is objectively noble, the strongest impulse wins. Safety replaces virtue, comfort replaces truth, and fear becomes the organizing principle of society.

This is exactly the cultural soil that produces Nice Guy Syndrome.

Nice Guy Syndrome
The Nice Guy is more or less polite, accommodating, conflict-avoidant, and morally fluent. He knows the language of empathy and inclusion. He can explain why everyone’s feelings matter. But under pressure, he freezes, appeases, or submits. He has not been trained to contain fear or act in defense of values. Lewis would say he has a head and a belly, but no chest.

Where C.S. Lewis diagnosed the philosophical problem, understanding the predictive brain supplies the missing mechanism. Men do not surrender standards because they have reasoned their way to relativism (no universal right or wrong). Rather, they do so because their nervous systems are governed by dread. Such a man prioritizes safety over meaning, approval over truth, and relief over responsibility. That might be worth reading again.

Let us be clear: this is not first a moral failure. It is a physiological one because we are largely run by our nervous systems, with conscious awareness riding along. George Vaillant noted the integrated nervous system (INS) denies, distorts and represses inner and/or outer reality to lessen anxiety and depression (Wisdom of the Ego, 1995).

Children require a mother, a father, and alloparents (grandparents, aunties, uncles, siblings, neighbours, etc.) to mature properly (Sarah Hrdy, Mother Nature, 1999). While no one emerges from childhood emotionally unscathed, it appears that multiple regulated adults distribute emotional load, model different responses to stress, and prevent over identification with a single nervous system. After all, a child experiences family physically before he experiences it intellectually.

A boy does not grow up under ideas so much as he grows up inside nervous systems. Should he be over-mothered and under-fathered, he is exposed too narrowly and for too long to a single emotional field. Without sufficient paternal containment among a wider circle of adult helpers, the child adapts by orienting toward emotional attunement rather than boundary, action, or risk.

Losing a perfectly-imperfect evolved balance countless millennia in the making means the young male learns to manage emotion rather than confront reality. He becomes sensitive, perceptive, and agreeable, but not grounded or decisive. This is why so many modern men are conflict avoidant yet emotionally fluent. They were trained early to regulate others rather than themselves.

Restoring the Chest
This is also what Robert Bly was pointing to in Iron John (1990) when he said that the boy must leave the mother to become a man. Bly was not attacking women or mothers. He was naming a developmental necessity: male maturity requires generational masculinity.

For most of human history, boys became men in the presence of fathers, grandfathers, uncles, cousins, big brothers, and friends. Masculinity was passed along through proximity, shared labor, and lived example. By watching other as well as older men, young males learned how to bear strain, contain fear, and act under pressure.

That transmission began to break down roughly two centuries ago with the industrial separation of home and work. As men left households for offices, factories, and mines, boys were increasingly raised by mothers, institutions, and abstractions. Masculinity became something explained rather than embodied.

Two hundred years later, Lewis names the result: men educated in moral language but untrained in moral capacity. Without that critical generational transition, the boy remains psychologically oriented toward approval and emotional safety rather than purpose and duty. Unknowingly, at an existential level his nervous system projects and defaults to seeking forms of maternal acceptance across his day-to-day life.

This is why virtue cannot be argued back into men. It must be internalized in the body-mind as experience. Moral language collapses when the nervous system has never been taught to tolerate strain without magnifying it into threat. You cannot reason someone into courage if his body interprets conflict as danger. Neither can you lecture a man into backbone when his physiology equates disapproval with abandonment.

Restoring the chest means training men to regulate fear, tolerate tension, and to act without folding when things go awry.  Until the body is brought back into order, moral appeals will continue to fail, and Lewis’s men without chests will remain easy to govern, easy to manipulate, and unable to say no when it matters most.

It means rebuilding moral instinct through lived practice, not slogans. This is why my framework begins with physiology. A man who cannot calm his body cannot hold a line. From there comes orientation toward higher meaning, accountability with other men, and responsibility through production. Courage is not a personality trait. It is a conditioned capacity, often felt in the chest.

Dark Tetradians
Lewis warned that a civilization that educates clever cowards will eventually be ruled by tyrants or technicians. Not because people are evil (though some are), but because they are untrained. When nothing is worth dying for, everything becomes negotiable, including human dignity.

Paul Bloom identified empathy as biased, parochial, too easily weaponized, and a poor basis for decision-making. (Against Empathy, 2016). Elevating empathy to highest virtue status means the emotionally expressive gain power, boundaries are framed as cruelty, and resistance decried as a lack of compassion.

Perhaps ten percent of human beings are personality disordered. They have always lived among us though tend to show up differently by sex. It is a mistake to say that dark tetrad personalities (Psychopathy, Machiavellianism, Narcissism, Sadism) lack empathy.

What they typically lack is emotional empathy, not cognitive empathy. They are often highly skilled at understanding what others feel, what motivates them, and where they are vulnerable. That understanding is then used instrumentally rather than relationally.

A nice guy (man without chest) is often high in affective empathy and low in boundaries. They feel others’ emotions intensely and mistake that feeling for moral obligation. Dark tetrad personalities, by contrast, understand what others feel, fear, and desire without sharing that emotional burden.

In a culture that elevates empathy while discouraging courage and moral hierarchy, a dangerous asymmetry develops. The empathetic yield when harried, while the manipulative gain leverage.

The dark tetrad personalities use this asymmetry to identify and exploit vulnerability. These types possess sufficient ego defenses to thrive on chaos and more easily rise in prominence… under weakened masculine order which fails to contain their excesses.

With rank-and-file prosocial males disempowered, Lewis’ predictions come true.

I am not rejecting compassion. I am all for restoring its spine. It’s just that compassion without courage collapses into control. The task now is not to make men nicer, but to make them steadier, braver, and capable of defense. That is what it means to rebuild the chest.

For what is a man, if not a defender. When a male refuses to defend it means someone else must step into the breach and defend for him. This is unacceptable.

We need to build Team Human men of character who thrive using power and love in defense of meaning and freedom. Men who can defend, deliver and decide for the good of us all.

Men with chests.

Questions? Comments?

True and Free…
cw

©2026 CHRISTOPHER K WALLACE, Advisor to Men™
all rights reserved.

Join us in building a Defender Destiny by taking this free course.
https://10mm.org/quad-cours*

Find the new ATM Defender App in your favourite app store…


Join the boards by clicking the image ^^

ATM DEFENDER APP INTRO

Advisor to Men Leave a comment

One of the things that struck me as I grew into middle age was that no one ever told me it was up to me to create order. Seems obvious maybe.

I had to run into the order versus chaos dichotomy from sheer ignorance borne from curiousity.

Meaning, it’s a damn good thing I like to read.

I suppose it’s also because I’d learned to be a manager in that purest of sales endeavours, the door-to-door crew business.

I’d hustled jobs and extra money as soon as I hit double digits in age and benefitted from my buddy and neighbour Graydon’s work ethic, but working doors over the years taught me plenty more.

When it comes to setting goals and making steady progress, what I see is that most guys have good intentions, often better than mine, but often fail to systematize their efforts to win.

Or they are blocked somehow.

Though women are usually exceptional organizers, order is key if we are to keep the forces of decay from overwhelming us. That’s very much a male responsibility.

I fling dumbbells around to keep grip strength and have done wall sits while brushing my teeth for decades to protect my knees. I used Day Timer’s system to organize my priorities in college (and still do to some extent).

From this attitude the quadrant system was born.


DAILY QUAD TRACKING
I like to add day of week (M,T,W, etc.) and put something in daily under each quadrant. Here I was with a pulled abdominal muscle but checked off 100 Jumping Jacks and 75 Pushups daily just the same. Tracking did that.

The quadrant system exists to organize daily actions across physiology, piety, people, and production, so that effort can be observed over time. It’s the daily actions, you see.

Like the way I’ve made my bed each morning for decades to “put order into my world.”

Like how I say psalm 118:24 to myself first thing when I pull the window curtain open in my room.

Even as a comfortable agnostic, these set my intentions for the day. It’s the rituals then.

These lessen anxiety, build resilience, form character, and often help with belonging.

For example ma went to church her whole life. Dad didn’t.

I asked him about it in his eighties, and he said he’d wished he’d attended.

Felt he’d missed out on the community.

 

Some psychologists liken us to herd animals, and tell of how the emotional system is governed by belonging.
The beautiful part of belonging is shared causes, and how as men stand shoulder to shoulder with each other they can accomplish just about anything.

And so, retired engineer and Defender Board member Gary took our stuff and built the Defender App for the benefit of all men. Gary is an amazing guy…

The Defender App supports the quadrant system by providing a stable place to record daily activity and revisit that record later.

Writing actions down creates a reference point that persists beyond mood, fatigue, or temporary self-assessment.

It’s also an app like none other.

WEEKLY CHECK IN 
It contains daily quadrant tracking and a weekly quadrant summarizing page.

It has place for a daily “to do” list and leaves room for a “one thing” to get done as this week’s priority.

Taking 15 minutes to review daily activity at the end of the week is really helpful, failing which I would need to assess how committed I am to progress in managing my life.

I like to review my daily activity and summarize them in a weekly “after action review” exercise every Sunday.

GOAL SETTING
Goal setting starts with a no-BS present time self assessment in each quadrant then it asks that you create goals in each for the next month, season, and year.

Firstly, it invites you to claim your identity by creating a Destiny Vision for each quadrant. Combined these make up a kind of deliberate masculine destiny path to follow.

This is critical for men.


We left room in seasonal and yearly goals to enter various levels of goals in each quadrant.

For example you can input a manageable goal, a slightly more challenging goal, a top end goal and a downright impossible or dream goal.

Having this stare you in the face each day helps you to decide what kind of man you want to be.

Ask: why be average when you can be amazing?

PRIVACY
In developing the app we thought about building an interface so you could also access your data on a desktop or laptop. I’ll tell you why we didn’t. We want your stuff to be fully private.

Besides, all of the goals and journaling entries can be saved to the journal section on the app itself or shared by email as a text file to keep in a file off the phone app itself.

Even though no one has time to look at your stuff, we didn’t even want the ability under any circumstance.

GETTING UNSTUCK 
A big reason for this is not just quadrant tracking and goal setting, but also the journaling functions which contain some of my best proprietary journaling techniques.

I refer to these as the “T Journals” as each can be described with a word beginning with T.

For example:

Option one is the open “free flow” journaling where you can enter whatever is on your mind. This is an important exercise where you can dump thoughts and feelings to find clarity.

Hence, “Talk Journaling”

Gratitude journaling encourages you to write at different intervals about whatever it is you have to be thankful for, a practice with profound effects on mental health in the way it reduces stress and depression, builds resilience, improves sleep, and enhances life satisfaction.

Hence, “Thanks! Journaling”

The blessings exercise follows that same idea and invites you to find three things that went well today, why those are important, and how to get more. I even get my kids to do this one.

Hence, “Tally! Journaling”

Caging the wolf will be familiar to those who have read Sipping Fear Pissing Confidence and has to do with refuting the “feed, fuck, kill, run, hide” lower order nervous system at play in addictions and general fear seeking. Instead, build your better character while claiming an identity you can be proud of.
A man must defend his confidence at all costs, I say.

Hence, “Temptation Journaling”

The 10R process is found in The Taming Shame course and has to do with identifying negative feelings but which may not fit the circumstances directly. These often signal an emotional trailhead of sorts. 10R provides a map so you can update your internal operating system.

Hence, “Trigger Journaling”

Lastly, the self care writing exercise is included so a man has a way of dealing with old wounds that might still be affecting his approach to life. This is the exact process I used to get past being beaten as a child, You may or may not make use of this deeper work, but it is there if needed.

Hence, “Trauma Journaling”

All of these can be saved into your personal journal library. The information stays on your phone where no one else can see. You can also send files to yourself.

I find that option particularly helpful when reviewing entries about temptation, being triggered, or about old traumatic events.

So, there you have it.
Daily tracking, weekly progress, goal setting based in facts and not in fiction and that build character and identity, as well as the most comprehensive journaling options possible.

The beauty of the system is if reluctance or inactivity interferes with intention it usually means there is work to do emotionally to resolve whatever is blocking a man’s progress. Combined, the various journaling options is like having an Advisor to Men™ in your pocket. Say what??

THE DEFENDER BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Ideally, you want a squad of men to whom you can turn to for feedback, like what we’ve created in The Defender Boards. The Defender App makes the whole process more efficient, and it’s gamification makes it fun too.


You have no doubt heard that what gets measured gets managed.

Life simplifies immensely with daily tracking because of its measurable progress.

The alternative might mean ten years go by only for a man to realize he did not, in fact, live a decade (or two), rather he lived a version of one year ten times.

Don’t be that man.

Set some goals, track your progress, defend your life.

Be an amazing guy…

Take the quad course, get the app, join the boards

Stay powerful, true and free…
cw

Don’t wait, get started today…

 Join us in building a Defender Destiny by taking this free course.
https://10mm.org/quad-courseVideo version of above: Defender App Intro video Dec,2025
https://youtu.be/4MhnQQWbuoo
🛡️ The Defender Board of Directors meets weekly in squads, daily in chat…
👉 Join here https://10mm.org/membership 
*Note Defender Board members get the Pro version of the app included.
Ask me for my special link to get in the board at less than the usual monthly app rate so you get both for less…

INNER WOMAN: INDIVIDUATION & THE ANIMA

Advisor to Men Leave a comment

The Four Faces of Her… Within You
Individuation, the Anima, and the Way Forward

Most men I work with are stuck. They are not broken. They are not weak. But they are stuck. Not because they lack willpower. Not because they do not want to grow. But because something inside is unfinished. In Jungian psychology, that unfinished business is often the anima.

My first psychology teacher, a Gestaltist, introduced me to this idea of leftover stuff, with its best practitioner Fritz Perls calling it a “gunnysack of anger” carried over the shoulder wherever you go.

Holy fuck did I carry a load! Maybe you do too… I felt the burden and I realized then and there I had plenty of work to do. I learned to let go of that weight over time.

Through my studies in Behavioural Science, in short order I was introduced to the archetypal psychology of Carl Jung.

Jung’s analytical psych mentions Individuation as the psychological process of integrating the conscious and unconscious parts of the self to become a whole, unique individual. This is integration at its simplest. It involves confronting and balancing inner archetypes, like the anima, to achieve personal growth and self-realization.

The work we do in the Taming Shame course using the Younger Self 10R process is all about understanding the unconscious motivations that drive us. Constructed emotion and the predictive brain alongside my behavioural training mesh well with this approach.

Look, I could go on and on about this stuff but I’ll stop here. THE WORK is about updating your operating system. I call it “using a Commodore 64 operating system in a Windows 11 world.” You may be old enough to get that reference.

Jung describes the anima as the unconscious feminine side of a man’s psyche, representing emotions, intuition, and relational qualities. It influences how he perceives and connects with women and his inner self, evolving through stages from Eve to Sophia as he matures (explained forthwith).

So the anima is the inner image of the feminine that every man carries. She is not a fantasy. She is not a wish. She is the psychic counterpart to your masculine soul.

If she is not integrated, she will distort your relationships. She will lure you into chaos or make you retreat into passivity.

If she is integrated, she becomes your guide to wisdom, purpose, and love.

Individuation means reconciling the parts of your psyche that have been split apart. It is not a goal you check off a list. It is a lifelong process of becoming whole.

One major part of that process is how your inner woman matures. Jung described four stages of anima development: Eve, Helen, Mary, and Sophia.

You will recognize yourself in one or more of these…


Eve is the mother. At this stage, a man seeks care, unconditional acceptance, and emotional security. Many men who were abandoned or smothered by their mothers are stuck here. They do not desire a partner. They desire to be soothed. Often, this leads to addiction, dependency, or an inability to lead.


Helen is the lover. Here, a man is captivated by beauty, youth, and sensual energy. He becomes driven by attraction. He judges women based on looks. He chases validation from women instead of leading them. He fears aging because his anima is still adolescent. This man can be charming but is often insecure.


Mary is the virtuous woman. This phase is marked by a desire for devotion and meaning. The man begins to look for a woman of character. He may idealize goodness. He starts to ask questions like, “What is a good life?” and “What kind of man should I be?” His anima is maturing, and his heart begins
to serve something beyond pleasure.


Sophia is wisdom. She is not beautiful in the youthful sense. She is radiant in the eternal sense. A man at this stage no longer projects fantasy onto women. He sees them as they are. He respects them, but he is no longer ruled by them. His inner feminine now guides him toward truth, meaning, and deep alignment with life.

Most men I see are stuck in Eve or Helen.
They are either looking for a woman to mother them or a woman to turn them on.

And get this: They rarely recognize that what they are seeking is already inside them.

That is the purpose of individuation. Not to find the perfect woman. But to become the integrated man.

You cannot skip these stages. But you can stop getting stuck or bouncing around from one to the other.
Your anima will grow with you if you let her.

It is only with the anima that a man blesses others with his King energy. That’s how it works.

Start by asking yourself honestly: Who am I really drawn to, and why? What do I want from women? What do I fear they might see in me? What kind of woman do I want beside me when I am dying?

Let her grow. And you will grow too. Reverse the flow…

If this stirred something in you, share it. Join the Defender Boards. Learn what it means to walk shoulder to shoulder with men committed to becoming whole.

Stay powerful, true and free…
cw

Father Custody Rights

Advisor to Men Leave a comment

The Marriage Contract Solution: A Father’s Case for Cultural Renewal
(A reflection on Stephen Baskerville’s argument for restoring marriage through father custody)

There’s a conversation we’re not having in the west, one that makes even the strongest men uncomfortable. Professor Stephen Baskerville of Warsaw University in Poland believes he’s found the key to unlocking not just the family crisis, but the west’s broader decline.

His solution is both simple and radical: make marriage legally binding again, with a presumption of father custody in divorce.

The Heart of the Matter:

Baskerville argues that our current “no-fault” divorce system has created what he calls a fraudulent contract. Imagine signing any other agreement where the other party could walk away at will, take half your assets, and remove your children from your life. You’d never sign such a document. Yet that’s exactly what marriage has become.

His proposal isn’t about fathers being superior parents—it’s about keeping families intact. When mothers know they can’t simply leave with the children, they’re far less likely to initiate divorce. When fathers know their parental rights are secure, they’re more likely to invest deeply in marriage and family life. Because that’s how it works.

The Ripple Effects:

What strikes me most about Baskerville’s argument is how he traces seemingly unrelated social problems back to this single source. Consider these connections:

Young men today lack motivation because they see no secure future in family life. Why work, save, and improve yourself when any family you build can be dismantled at will? Father custody would restore that fundamental incentive structure.

The welfare system becomes largely unnecessary when families stay together. Single motherhood, with all its associated poverty and social problems, becomes the exception rather than the rule.

Crime and social decay in our cities trace back overwhelmingly to fatherless homes. Restore the father’s role, and you restore order to communities.

The Deeper Philosophy:

There’s something profound here about authority and responsibility. Our current system has created what Baskerville calls “emasculation”—not in a crude sense, but in the deeper meaning of removing men’s authority as leaders of their children and families.

When a man cannot be certain his investment in family will be protected, when his role as father exists only at the discretion of others, we’ve fundamentally undermined the natural order that built Western civilization. Given human evolutionary history shows and still shows human children are best raised by a mother and a father and a series of helpers (alloparents) — see Sarah Blaffer Hrdy, Emeritus Professor of Anthropology at University of California Davis and her book, Mother Nature — subverting father’s role is nothing less than unnatural.

This isn’t about domination—it’s about responsibility. A man who knows his family depends on him will rise to meet that responsibility. Again, because that’s how it works.

The Political Reality:

Baskerville suggests that even strong leaders like Trump avoid this issue because it requires confronting forces that have made careers out of the current system. The family court industrial complex, the welfare bureaucracy, the entire apparatus built around broken families—they all have vested interests in maintaining the status quo.

But here’s what I find especially compelling: this solution requires no new government programs, no massive spending, no complex bureaucracy. It simply requires restoring one principle: that marriage means something legally binding.

The Strategic Insight: Feminism’s Achilles’ Heel:

Baskerville makes a crucial observation that goes deeper than policy reform. Drawing on the work of scholar Daniel Amneus and activist Phyllis Schlafly, he argues that feminism’s entire power structure rests on one foundation: mother custody after divorce.

“The linchpin in the feminist program is mother custody following divorce,” he writes. “Pull that pin…and the feminist structure collapses.”

This isn’t just about family law—it’s about understanding the source of feminist power itself.

According to Amneus, feminism’s central impulse is “the demand for unlimited sexual freedom and female-dominated reproduction.” As he put it: “A woman’s right to have a baby without having the father around is what feminism is all about.”

The historical progression reveals the strategy: after securing the vote, feminists’ first major achievement was the welfare state, followed by no-fault divorce. Both innovations served the same goal—transferring authority over children from married fathers to single mothers.

The National Association of Women Lawyers (USA) proudly called no-fault divorce “the greatest project NAWL has ever undertaken.” Are you kidding me?

This creates what Baskerville, and others call a climate of fear that extends far beyond individual families. When women can divorce at will, take the children and assets, and consign men to “state-enforced servitude,” it doesn’t just affect divorced men—it makes all men fearful of marriage itself.

Government officials learned from this matriarchal model how to create other bureaucratic tyrannies, understanding that “ordinary men heading families pose the principal impediment to their power.”

The Marriage Strike as Leverage:

Here’s where the whole argument becomes particularly interesting. We see that conventional political methods—lobbying, protesting, organizing—won’t work for men seeking to restore family stability. But men already possess a powerful form of leverage: they’re increasingly refusing to marry, date, or start families. No one is born aspiring to become an Incel.

Rather than seeing this “marriage strike” as merely a symptom of social decay, Baskerville views it as potential ammunition. Men are already voting with their feet. The question is whether this spontaneous boycott can be directed toward specific legal reforms.

Think about the logic: if women derive power from their ability to control access to children and sexual relationships, then men’s withdrawal from those relationships removes that source of power. It is economic pressure applied to the most fundamental human institutions.

The Path Forward:

The beauty of the father custody solution its clarity. Instead of getting lost in a dozen different battles, we are better to focus on this single, achievable goal: Make marriage contracts enforceable with father custody as the default. Watch as the incentives align to strengthen rather than destroy families.
1-2…

The claim is that this one change would accomplish more than any collection of smaller reforms. Why? Because it strikes at what he sees as the root of the problem rather than its symptoms.

Would there be challenges? Certainly. Would some bad fathers gain custody they shouldn’t have? Possibly. But Baskerville argues—and I find myself agreeing—that these costs pale beside the wholesale destruction of family life we’ve accepted as normal.

Look, she is the burdened female creator of life. He is the expendable male powerful defender of life. Together, with plenty overlap, they are Team Human.

As creator, one side has more chaos, while the other defends with order.  The culture has become so feminized and chaotic that it now requires drastic masculine order to restore balance. Enforceable marital contracts with default father custody honours children with two parents while also respecting our evolutionary history. It’s what brought us this far.

A Personal Reflection:

Reading Baskerville’s argument, I’m struck by how it connects to something deeper than policy—it touches on what it means to be a man in modern North America, Australia, Europe, and likely the West in general. We’ve created a society where a man’s most important role, as father and protector of his family, exists only at the pleasure of others. This is fucked up.

I remember arguing with my first wife about her egregious behaviour as she planned yet another overnight trip out of town to see her gal pal. I protested and she whirled about to face me on the front steps of our home. “If you don’t like it we’ll divorce and I will make sure you never see your son again!,” she said… with such vehemence I believed her. She knew I’d never leave him.

And every time I nudged her closer to marital counselling she’d provoke a fight and refuse to go. The custody issue meant she held all the cards and could pursue her dysfunction at will.

No fool, in his late teens the boy asked me why I hadn’t divorced her already. He saw, he knew. I finally left when he was 20 or so.

Perhaps that’s why this conversation makes us uncomfortable. It forces us to confront not just failed policies, but failed assumptions about human nature, family, and the proper ordering and sustainability of society.

The question isn’t whether Baskerville is completely right about every detail. The question is whether we have the courage to admit that our current approach has failed spectacularly, and whether we’re willing to try something that might actually work.

Males are taught to be men by generations of men around them — most important of which is the father. An externality of the capitalist system — that began in the Victorian era as men left home to go to work — is that this critical contact has been lost. Now, most men grow up confused, left longing for maternal acceptance learned from being over-mothered. It’s all they know.

Though the danger of nuclear war looms large on any given day, it is not global warming or communism or authoritarianism that is the biggest threat. The biggest problem is weak men. The world desperately needs powerful rank and file prosocial defender males running families… lest we continue to be led by Dark Tetradians and their hybristophillic followers.

We ought to build our cultures with the underlying premise that children have the right to both a mother and a father. We need Team Human in balance. Honour the marriage contract and you restore the foundation upon which healthy society rests.

Let yourself imagine how that might be…

Questions? Comments?

True and free…
cw

©2025 ATM NEWS
Christopher K Wallace
|Advisor to Men ™

Join us in the Defender Boards today:

Defender Board of Directors link

_________________________________________________

The Case for Father Custody Reform: Legal Talking Points

  1. The Marriage Contract Has Been Legally Nullified Marriage is now the only civil contract in which one party can walk away unilaterally, seize half the assets, and take custody of the children—with the full enforcement of the state. No other contract permits this level of one-sided breach with legal reward. That is not a contract—it is entrapment.
  2. Parens Patriae Is Overreach Masquerading as Protection The doctrine of parens patriae gives the state ultimate authority over children, not parents. It’s sold as protection, but functionally it means the state—not the family—decides what’s best. This inverts natural law and erodes the integrity of parenthood.
  3. Custody Law Ignores the Child’s Right to a Father Family courts systematically violate a child’s birthright to be raised by both parents. They treat the father as optional, conditional, and replaceable—often using vague or unproven standards like “best interest” to mask biased rulings.
  4. The Primary Custody Standard Is Institutionalized Sex Discrimination Awarding custody to mothers by default is sex-based discrimination. Imagine any other legal context where such a presumption is tolerated. This practice violates constitutional protections and equality under the law.
  5. Family Courts Operate Without Due Process Family courts routinely remove children, homes, and finances from fathers without trial, evidence, or jury. Allegations alone—without proof—are enough to restrict paternal rights. No due process. No justice.
  6. No-Fault Divorce Plus Maternal Custody = State-Sanctioned Family Sabotage Unilateral no-fault divorce, combined with custody laws that reward the initiator, encourages family breakdown. The result is state-supported family sabotage that incentivizes abandonment and punishes stability.
  7. The State Has Incentivized Divorce Through Financial Engineering Welfare programs, federal funding formulas, and legal aid structures reward father removal and subsidize single motherhood. The state profits—literally—when fathers are ousted.
  8. Presumption of Father Custody Rebalances Risk and Restores Order A legal presumption of father custody (especially when the mother initiates divorce without cause) would restore marriage as a serious contract. Men will once again invest when protected from institutional betrayal.
  9. Judicial Discretion Is a Veil for Ideological Enforcement Family law judges are not neutral. Their wide discretion enables ideological bias—often rooted in feminist legal theory or outdated maternal preference models. This discretion must be curbed.
  10. Reform Isn’t About Power—It’s About Responsibility This is not a campaign to dominate women. It is a campaign to restore accountable fatherhood as the central pillar of a stable society. Male authority and responsibility rise together. Let the law reflect that truth.

Advisor to Men™ | Cultural Renewal Through Legal Truth www.advisortomen.com

The Masculine Maturity Shield

Advisor to Men Leave a comment

 

PRESENTED TO YOU BY:

THE MASCULINE MATURITY SHIELD

Note: after watching, ask how you can apply these principles to other areas of life.
Even if a man does not have a relationship, a partner, children, etc. it STILL falls to him.
He defends meaning and freedom for all.
Nature’s system doesn’t work any other way…

CHRISTOPHER K WALLACE
Advisor to Men™
For the Defender Board of Directors

Defender Board of Directors link

 

NICE GUY NERVOUS SYSTEM

Advisor to Men Leave a comment


Nice Guy Syndrome for what it truly is…

Second wave feminism arose during the ’50s, ’60s, and ’70s during the baby boom in a great vacuum of male weakness. It was a time of turmoil where many ideals were being challenged.

One of the results was a striking increase of women attending post-secondary education. Male dominated departments were suddenly overwhelmed with new perspectives on science. That continues today.

One of the brilliant researchers to come out of that educational era is Shelley Taylor. Taylor realized most all the work on fear to date had been done with male subjects.

She began with rodents in her lab and saw that when under threat, the females tended to affiliate with each other. Some of the males did so too but it was primarily a female response to stress.

I first came upon her work on what she called “tend and befriend” for females under threat about ten years ago while researching my first book, Drinkers Riddle.

In fact, in chapter one of Sipping Fear Pissing Confidence (Crux Bamboozle) I posit this typically feminine response to fear is also at the crux of a woman’s alcohol intoxication.

On occasion, I might mention this to the men I work with, i.e. that if he’s buying her drinks and thinks she’s sweet on him, it may not be him, but the booze.

Upon hearing my explanation, one man I worked with said, “You just ruined my life.”

We had a good laugh about that.

Let the truth set you free, I say.

Others since have described Taylor’s “tend and befriend” as “fawn,” which fits nicely with fight, flight, fawn, freeze.

What’s this got to do with men? Plenty.

You see, parents install abandonment fear in a child to leverage survival. They are perfectly imperfect in the way they do this.

Their approach can range from teaching you how to look both ways before stepping on a road (so you don’t get run over), or to hold mom’s hand in a mall parking lot for the same reasons.

I am sure you’ll agree those are fairly innocent, necessary, and unavoidable interventions.

But it can also mean threatening to send a child away to Boys Reformatory at age six because your two big brothers and their boisterous play inside the house were driving her nuts (as in my case).

There are a multitude of circumstances where a child might acquire the idea that mom (or dad) will leave them behind. We are sensitive to these things from the start.

Often, I relate how the baby arrives at birth and the greatest sales job on the planet occurs when the newborn convinces mom to take it under her care. Crying, clutching, and smell are some of the ways a baby sells her on NOT abandoning her or him… to the elements and the animals.

It’s primal stuff, for sure. Furthermore, in the beginning the child has no idea of the separation between them and mom, something it only realizes in the months ahead. That egocentricity remains in the human animal in diminishing degrees for life. We have self-interested brains.

You have a brain for executive function, as well as a spinal column with peripheral nerves for fight or flight. Internally, the vagus nerve connects all your internal organs, your skin, even your balls, and is wired into two places in the brain stem to keep the brain apprised of your body state.

The lowest order nervous system uses the dorsal vagus (digestion, sex, freeze) for immobilization and is the most ancient at around 500 million years old.

Fight and flight occur instantaneously through activations from the spinal column to musculature and is said to have developed some 400 million years ago.

Both of these nervous system functions are in place in the first trimester of gestation.

The upper ventral vagus controlling heart, lungs, throat, voice and facial muscles came with the advent of mammals some 200 million years ago.

It is used to convey feelings and to discern other’s emotional states using facial expressions and voice. It also regulates our internal homeostasis (emotional balance).

This part of your nervous system only comes online in the third trimester of pregnancy, presumably when the baby begins to hear its mother’s voice outside the womb.

At birth, mom’s use of “motherese” talk (ex. “Oh, my little man, are you hungry?” said in a sing song voice) continues the nervous system training.

It’s from these humble beginnings over the first fourteen years of life that the child more or less forges an emotional template for connection.

So two things: protection mode is primarily lower order dorsal and peripheral nervous system activation while connection mode uses ventral nervous system activation for reassurance and to restore emotional balance. Secondly, we are herd animals.

So why is “fawn” relevant to the average nice guy? For several reasons.

Nowadays, we tend to be over-mothered and under-fathered, and children experience families physically.

This means that little boys will see their nervous system attune to their mother’s nervous system for survival reasons. All mammals do this to some degree in the wild.

It’s why I can spot deer through my monocular lens in the bush while hiding behind a tree and see her ears scanning the area like radars looking for me though I remain hidden.

Beside her, a fawn remains immobilized. It knows something is up with mom so doesn’t dare move.

Women generally carry more negative emotion, which having read me before you realize is an evolutionary adaptation she uses for survival.

If a child’s main exposure in the family is mom, and there are little or no countering male influences of note, expect that child to grow up with a sensitivity, if not a propensity, for anxiety and depression, more often than not.

That’s how it works.

Shelley Taylor’s research showed that males tended towards fight or flight, while females more easily resorted to tend and befriend.

Oxytocin, critical in caregiving, is thought to play a role in this need to connect to others by way of the opioid system which regulates reward and pain related behaviours by acting to mitigate fight or flight. Under threat, women tend to good will, or at least hope for it.

A psychcentral.com article mentions these ways fawning shows up:
– stifling your own needs
– finding authentic self-expression challenging
– flying under the radar
– having trouble saying “no”
– over-apologizing
– holding back opinions or preferences that might seem controversial
– experiencing chronic pain or illness
– having depression,
– trouble with personal boundaries
– assuming responsibility for the emotional reactions and responses of others
– fixing or rescuing people from their problems
– attempting to control other’s choices to maintain a sense of emotional safety
– denying your own discomfort, complaints, pain, needs, and wants
– changing your preferences to align with others.

Sound familiar? Don’t get too hung over trauma as it’s tossed around all over the internet. Instead…

Notice how these are part and parcel Nice Guy traits.

It’s why I tell anxious men they have their mother’s nervous system.

So, what do? This nervous system template was the best mom (and possibly dad) could do under the circumstances.

I often tell men that if your parent’s kept you alive until age twenty and you can say please and thank you, as far as nature’s concerned, they have done their job.

What’s important is to realize they were a stepping stone along your journey, and as an adult, you retain the right and obligation to update your operating system to meet the demands of life around you.

Remember that Nice Guys have a shame- and anxiety-based syndrome sourced in abandonment fear.

So, the idea is to take the Taming Shame course and learn how to integrate the Younger Self.

One way to do that is to confront each of the behaviours on this list at a minimum and instead of “falling into fawn, freeze or fight or flight,” meet them proactively and assertively head-on.

You do that by pushing through your resistance and enacting a different response using thought, feeling and behaviour.

That’s all you own in life brother, what you think, how you feel, and what actions you take.

In my experience, once you do the above and forge new ways of doing things in a circumstance a handful to times, you have handed your nervous system a fresh concept it can use as a template to use again and again in the future.

At that point, you have upgraded your nervous system and it’s much less likely to regress to the old ways of doing things. In effect, you have updated your O/S.

But keep in mind, some of these new ways will transpose themselves onto other similar contexts, but it’s unlikely to happen completely. Old ways are on autopilot to save the brain energy.

It is more likely that you will need to recognize when you are in protection mode versus connection mode and realize an opportunity to upgrade.

The Taming Shame course teaches all that.

In this way, you update your model of the world and make one more step forward in the face of fear.

Do it for you, for the people around you, for the culture at large. It is men who balance out the two genders, masculine and feminine.

She is the burdened female creator of life.
He is the expendable male powerful defender of life.
Together, with some overlap, they are Team Human.

If a man refuses to be a powerful defender of life, he reverts to expendability.

Don’t let that happen.

The world desperately needs powerful men.

Questions? Comments?

true and free…
cw

CHRISTOPHER K WALLACE, BST, CH, CPIC
Counsellor, Mentor, and Advisor to Men ™
chris@advisortomen.com
advisortomen.com
Book with me here:
https://go.oncehub.com/ChristopherWallace
Socials
https://www.facebook.com/groups/niceguysunite
https://www.facebook.com/chris.wallace.advisortomen
https://www.instagram.com/chris_wallace_advisortomen
https://Chris_wallace_advisor_to_men@advisortomen
Find the book online at Audible and Amazon
SIPPING FEAR PISSING CONFIDENCE

Find the Taming Shame course here: do the work

Get your free sleep cure course here

ALPHA-BETA

Advisor to Men Leave a comment

ALPHA/BETA
One way to approach this subject is to look up Frans de Waal’s video on Chimpanzees to better understand the term alpha.

Labeling someone an alpha or beta is demeaning to people. For one thing, no such thing exists in humans. Why not? Because human life is too complex for such a simple term.

If we were limited to a highly predictable existence where we ate leaves all day and slept in a nest of grasses at night, interspersed with banging a few females, maybe. But, we don’t.

I like to say that if you are broken down at night in the middle of buttfuck nowhere your money or muscles don’t matter. The only alpha around is the tow truck driver who shows up to rescue your stranded ass.

Men defer to expertise. That’s one reason we build cultures. And, everyone has something to offer. None of us is expert at everything. “None of us knows the all of anything,” is the quote by Robert Louis Stevenson my father had written in marker on his bookcase at home.

Sure, we exist on a continuum of maternal care at one end and predatory aggression at the other, and we tend to form hierarchies. But those tend to always be job or context specific.

When the general gets to a river with his army, he calls in the raft guys to get across—if they are successful, they win the day and are celebrated (like the tow truck operator in the middle of the night). When the general gets to a castle wall, the siege machine operators will carry the day. And why is there a general? It’s because he knows enough shit to lead an army. It’s all context. In fact, context is everything.

If you work at a high-tech company and you’re the smartest engineer out of 200 and can work hard and be social, expect to rise to the top. Everyone under you is beta? Come on.

No man is all things in all situations.

The other issue is labeling in general doesn’t allow as easily the transition from weakness to power. It says you are “this way” or “that way” when in fact, all of us have the capacity to be weak at times, just as we all have the capacity to be more powerful.

I’ve had occasion to think hard about labels because of my own life and expertise around addictions. I’ve known too many hard-core gangsters who became decent men, myself included. And, I have known people written off as hopeless alcoholics or junkies who defeated their compulsion. Too many to call them names.

I much prefer to use weakness and powerful because any weak man can act and be more powerful in an instant if he’s called to do so by his spirit. That’s why we love the come-from-behind story of the underdog vanquishing obstacles to succeed at something. From weakness and insignificance to power and significance is within reach for each and everyone one of us.

Self concept is how you see yourself contrasted against how you believe others see you. One is the character you build and the identity you form, the other is the remnant personality and habits derived from your environmental feedback loop.

The younger you are the more you experience your environment physically (read family, school, etc.). Those experiences are recorded into the very neurons of your body. That’s where feelings and your subconscious exist. You have the same neurons for life.

The male brain doesn’t fully develop until age thirty. That’s why addictions are often picked up before that age. It’s also the age where a significant amount of people give up an addiction on their own. (the rest need extra help and keep men like me busy).

So why would we saddle a male with a term like beta? I’ll tell you why: Competition derived from predatory aggression and our tendencies to hierarchies.

There are two main ways males tend to compete.

In one way, we go head to head, mano a mano, or often against a group of men. Each lays down their best performance and may the best man win. This is how we discover who among us has expertise we can use for the group’s benefit. Afterwards, in that context, we remember who our top man or men are, so that if that situation arises again, we know who to call.

Men tend to have relationships with a wide variety of groups of other men. They can form loose bonds and move in and out of these groups with a fair amount of ease. Women, on the other hand, tend to have just one or two (and usually no more than five) girlfriends she guards jealously. These she uses for emotional regulation. Men generally have no such need.

This is another reason why men build cultures; and why women tend to stress-test them.

But it’s the second way men compete which is often problematic: It’s the put down.

Men test each other from an early age. You can see it in kids as young as grade two or three, where boys push each other to find out if you are a girl or a boy. Researchers who study this figure it’s because it is boys who grow up and defend their tribes and nations.

It is said the calling out and such is an early form of making sure the other males will be able to stand next to you and fight the enemy later in life. The literature suggests an innate trait.

Little boys create imaginary enemies early in life. Little girls do not do this. Give a piece of cloth to five-year-old kids and a boy will make a cape and become a superhero; a little girl spreads it on the ground and has a picnic with her dolls and stuffed toys.

If you hook up fMRI to males and present them with two situations, one where he competes head to head fairly, and one where he competes by putting others down, the same reward centers of the brain light up, and doesn’t discern between the two.

This may be why bullying will never completely go away.

Examining these two approaches used by men, one is prosocial, while the other is not. Anything beyond mild ball busting is, in most cases, very much antisocial, but derived from that insecurity found in children who test each other’s interdependence.

We don’t apologize for being men. That’s my stance. Yet, that doesn’t mean we don’t try to become better men. Or, in fact, grow into becoming the best men we can be.

So, men’s way of challenging each other exists on a competition continuum. It might go from head to head group or individual competing to mild ball busting to calling each other out directly to outright bullying to punching each other in the face.

I’d ask anyone reading this if calling others “beta men” is just a way to affirm their own status, a way to aggrandize themselves at someone else’s expense. What’s behind that?

Given what we know about how people take in information from their environments below age thirty, who does it help to call someone beta?

That part of self-concept which derives from how you believe others see you can both propel you forward but also become a burden. For many, their family of origin programming and childhoods are a cross they bear.

Trust me when I say I have lived too faulted a life to judge anyone else’s with much conviction.

I was once diagnosed an antisocial after I shot someone and spent 30 days in a locked psychiatric ward being assessed by the courts. You can bet that label followed me thereafter.

I’ve also been weak in my lifetime enough times to know people can and do change. I’m living proof a man can claim his power for good if he wants. Yet, it is only by bringing things into awareness that we advance the possibility of change.

Which brings me to my last point: something I call PHD. The paradox of human development says adults make your decisions when you were a child experiencing your environment physically (remember, your brain does not fully develop until near age 30).

You needed protection, shelter, sustenance, and nurturing, and so, created a conforming ego to survive. You did this with the heart and mind of a child, internalizing sensations, images, behaviours, feelings, and meanings, which obscured your true self.

We all have this judgmental side to us as a result. When we judge ourselves, others, or circumstances harshly, we are operating from the basis of what Freud called the superego. Carl Jung called it the conforming ego.

It’s Grandma’s law: “eat your vegetables before dessert.” It’s: “don’t talk back to adults.” It’s all the rules you were told to follow… for your own good. It’s the demand you tow the line.

It’s that part of you which was taught to you by parents and teachers and other adults around you as a child echoing in the back of your mind, often showing up as the “inner critic.”

These thoughts are usually expressed under the tyranny of words like “should, would, could, what if, if only and must,” serving to remind you that you are not good enough, keeping you fearful and uncertain. Not only do we beat ourselves up under this conforming ego, but we project it out to the people around us and our circumstances. We make demands of others.

We have studied this: it’s not your best side. I go further: your quest in life is to dampen this conforming ego and develop your own identity, one which manifests your gifts. The conforming ego is stultifying, existing only to keep you safe. It keeps you playing small.

Watching Frans De Waal’s talk about alpha chimps—who do spend all day eating leaves and sleeping in nest of grasses at night and banging chimp wenches—you will discover the basis of what Jung called the King archetype in humans. Chimp DNA is less than 3% different than that of humans (male and female humans have less than a 2% difference).

De Waal’s alpha chimp not only get to bang the wenches, but also get to look after ALL the members of the troupe, right down to the weakest. Roosters do the same thing.

And, if an alpha chimp doesn’t work to benefit the whole troupe, a few lesser males will get together and take him out. Humans do the same thing. A version of this leaked out from Vietnam vets in the 1970s about “fragging” a bully unit commander. In the heat of battle, it was “sorry, somehow, Sarge took one to the back of the head.” Happens with gangsters all the time as well.

That’s another compelling reason why using the term alpha for humans is misplaced.

Archetypes are instinctual energies found in all of mankind. Everywhere you go, people are afraid of the dark. Everywhere you go, people are afraid of heights. And, the same metaphors are repeated in cultural histories the world over despite being continents and millennia apart.

Carl Jung said these archetypes were proof of the existence of a “collective unconscious.” One such energy is the King archetype. It exists in every man.

According to Jungian analysts Moore and Gillette, the archetype of the King is responsible for order, fertility, and blessings.  What is a realm without order?

Now, we are not referring to wanton order imposed by a tyrant. No. We are speaking of order in the sense the needs of the many outweigh those of the few. We are talking Golden Rule.

Fertility is all about the mental, physical, social, and spiritual health of the ruler whose acts are in service of the greater good. It’s the benevolent King. When the King is healthy and rules with passion for his people, the crops grow, the granaries and pantries of the kingdom are full, and the loyalty of the people is assured. And, the women willingly produce offspring.

Blessings are the Kingly equivalent of encouragement. In a monarchy, the King might “Knight” a subject as a way of recognizing their contribution to society. He may even create an “order” bearing their name. The King can hand out “merits” and other rewards to the citizens of the realm.

Suffice it to say, a man aware of his King energy will see the good in people, often before they see it in themselves, and makes sure to let others know they are appreciated.

Look, I’m not perfect at this but you can bet we all live more powerful lives when we embrace our King energy and live up to our “true self.” Judging others always comes from a place of fear. Better to just notice how others are and then rise to your best self.

The advantage of the higher self is that it sees the silver lining, the gift in anything. This energy can spot the gold in others and serves to bring out people’s best.

Your duty to the universe is to find your true self once more.

It is to examine the beliefs, meanings, sensations, images, feelings, and behaviours inherited from your PHD upbringing, discarding what you have outgrown while adopting a truer identity with which to manifest your gifts.

Not because you can, not because you want to, but because it is what you owe.

Stay powerful, never give up
cw

©CKWallace, June, 2020, all rights reserved
Advisor to Men, Mentor at Large
advisortomen.com

CLICK HERE FOR A FREE DISCOVERY CALL

CHIVALROUS BOYS

Advisor to Men Leave a comment

CHIVALROUS BOYS
No one becomes a parent with the intention to fuck a kid up. Every parent has good intentions. It’s a paradox of human development that we arrive here out of chaos but also from the infinite wisdom of a universe which does not make mistakes. It would be hubris to believe otherwise.

When it comes to men and women, it has been decades since I abandoned the notion that the two genders are similar enough to assign differences to some minor configuration of upbringing or inborn temperament or personality.

To be sure women can do pretty much anything a man can do but will have durable preferences found around the world. It is said there is less than 2% difference in male and female DNA. Not much, until you consider the DNA differences between humans and chimpanzees is somewhere around 3%.

The important of fathers to young boys is in the news, with many believing it is a crisis prevalent in western culture. Books and blogs abound on the subject, not only about absent fathers but inadequate ones too. We have suffered several generations of decline in the role of men in their children’s lives as the move to cities replaced the family farm of old.

For men actively raising sons, I want to urge caution when confronted by the egalitarian forces of political correctness. While my daughter should have equal opportunity in life as should my son, they are too different to be called equals outside that they are both little humans beloved by their parents.

Recently, a large study was undertaken in New York and Illinois involving 200 kids. The study tested for chivalrous behaviour in young boys. The international study, carried out in partnership with New York University (NYU), found that “both boys and girls have ingrained sexist attitudes towards women.

Girls change these attitudes as they age, however, boys tend to keep their “benevolent, patronizing views”, surmises the study published in the scientific journal Sex Roles.

It is my contention these kinds of studies, often widely reported in the news, are not worth the paper they are written on.

Authors of the study asked a couple of hundred kids questions and used benevolent statements like ‘men need to protect women from danger’ as well as hostile questions, like ‘women get more upset than men about small things’.

Incredibly (or laughably) researchers found “hostile sexism decreased with age for both boys and girls, benevolent sexism decreased with age only for girls.”

So we are not talking about the idea that women get more upset or are more emotional as a prejudice carried into adulthood, but specifically “benevolent sexism” such as wanting to protect women from danger.

Furthermore, the authors contend this means little boys grow up to be “patronizing” to women. Because, of course, wanting to protect women (and by extension, children) is somehow putting women down.

It is precisely the kind of white night claptrap that has good-intentioned men everywhere confused. Thank the social constructionists for this one.

These two men, Matthew Hammond from University of Victoria and Andrei Cimpian from NYU are idiots. Hammond insists, “these principles (men defending women from danger) could be harmful down the track.”

Let me bring you in on a little secret. Girls are egalitarian, boys are competitive. In study after study, at very young ages—well before nurture can supplant nature—little girls and little boys see and act in the world differently.

Scarcity creates value. That’s why diamonds and gold are expensive. A man produces billions of sperm per month, she usually produces one egg.

Her value as a caregiver to young and old and everyone in between makes her the more precious sex. In the most egalitarian cultures of the world like the Scandinavian countries, women with the greatest options still choose to become teachers and nurses and caregivers.

Give a 2 x 3 foot piece of material to a 4 year old boy and one to a girl and he’s making a cape to become a superhero to fight enemies while she spreads it out on the ground to have a picnic with her dolls and stuffies.

Give kids in grade school word puzzles in a team of eight, boys will compete and give each other answers contributing to the whole while girls find ONE girl they can pair up with and work on their puzzle, effectively turning a team of 8 girls into four teams of two. They get things done but in their own way.

Get grade school kids to race each other. Boys and girls together: best times; boys against boys: best times; girls against girls: times drop. Why? Because to standout among the other girls means risking social exclusion. We compete differently.

A study of almost a half million over twenty years in Europe confirmed men’s advantage in all things spatial whereas women were better at reading emotions and verbal skills. Things or people is a real male to female preference.

So, none of these require men to protect a woman. They are just differences between two complimentary sexes. Nature had a plan.

However, men are heavier, taller and have greater lung capacity. They have bigger hearts and more red blood cells. Their wounds heal faster. The cranium in males is thicker in front.

Men have denser and stronger bones whereas women have more delicate skeletons, including a thinner cranium (I cringe watching female boxing). Men have larger teeth, more muscle and less fat.

We are stronger by 50% in the upper body and by 40% in the lower body. Our hand strength is greater—which is why you open the pickle jars at home.

Men’s brains are about a quarter pounder bigger but neurons fire differently. His connectivity is more back to front and within hemisphere, whereas she has greater connectivity between the two hemispheres.

But where guys like Hammond and Cimpian get off the track is in decrying that little boys are being nurtured to have patronizing views of women just because they carry chivalrous tendencies as children that endure. There is no such danger.

Would you have women not be defended by men? What kind of culture would that produce?

Intra-partner violence occurs at the same rate of less than one in five couples with differences in how men and women fight contributing to varying consequences. There exists a tiny percentage of males who are serial abusers. One of the best remedies for such a woman is to surround herself with other men who can protect her from such a man. It works, well.

I have a young son going to turn seven and a daughter who has just turned nine. You can bet I want my boy defending his sister. Just as I want her looking out for him as he winds his way through school two grades behind her.

Little boys grow up to be the young men who defend nations, standing shoulder to shoulder with other young men and fighting enemies. They prepare their whole lives for this possibility. It’s a hardwired trait which shows up in the crib.

There is good reason we admonish young men with scolds like “that’s no way to treat a lady” and “ladies first” and so forth. Would you have a sinking Titanic with the men leaving the women and children on deck and filling the lifeboats to save themselves because otherwise their chivalry might seem “patronizing?”

Look, these fuckwads who call themselves social scientists are a passing fad.

I want to bring your attention to the Lindy Effect: a book which has been published for one hundred years and still being read is almost assuredly going to be read in one hundred years more. A book published three months ago has almost no chance of being read in a hundred years.

See the difference? I’ll bet on nature. Maybe you should too.

Human sexes are complimentary. We came to fit each other like a lock and key over millions of years of evolution to the efficiencies of modern existence.

We have always banded together and taken advantage of each other’s strengths while shoring up each other’s weakness. In my humble opinion, it is unnatural to NOT defend a woman who needs it, just as it is unnatural to discourage this essential protector spirit in our young boys.

Every young man needs to learn how to treat a lady. Not only is it polite, the differences in how women process information and their differing priorities in life, as well as the contrasts in approaches to competition and to intimate relationships require finesse.

A boy should learn this from his mother for she is his model for love. And as surely as he must leave her to become a man, his respect for women hopefully remains. It is her prerogative to teach her boys what she feels they should know, just as it will be part of their maturation to leave behind that which no longer serves them once they reach and live their adulthood. Besides, that’s part of what dads are for: to offer perspective as well as their experience.

We need more chivalry, not less. The answer to problems of masculinity is more masculinity, not less. The young boys in this study display some of the best of what it is to be male and these dipshits sociologist want to erase it in the name of remotely possible “patronizing” behaviour later. This is male weakness at play, the feminization of the school system all the way past graduate levels.

Besides, the challenges and fun between the sexes are mostly in our differences. These we should celebrate as fantastic challenges for which we were made.

Stay powerful, never give up
cw

CHRISTOPHER K WALLACE
Advisor, mentor

©2019 CKWALLACE all rights reserved

Chivalrous boy behavior Hammond

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/world/2020/04/chivalrous-behaviour-from-boys-may-be-early-warning-sign-of-sexism-study-finds.html

Physiological sex diffences
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_human_physiology

Racing grade school kids
The Sexual Paradox, Susan Pinker (2008) chapter 8

Grade school word puzzle teams
Warriors and Worriers, Joyce Benenson, (2014)

Other worthwhile reading:
Men and Women, an Inside Story, Donald Plaff, (2011)
Sex Differences in Cognitive Abilities, 4th edition, Diane Halpern, (2012)