Oddbean new post about login | logout The men who are "...kind, protective, doting, and generous..." also need to have a self-constrained capacity for danger, an important nuance. There is no Virtue in being harmless
Protective men are not harmless, by very definition. Don't know why you see a conflict there. He shouldn't be smacking his wife and kids around, to prove his bonafides.
Protective doesn't mean they are capable of providing such protection.
It usually does, tho. Simply being able to live in a low-crime neighborhood in a well-built house with safe transport and having good health care and healthy food already solves for most danger. One of the things "beta males" excel at is "collective security". Pooling resources and effort to create a safe environment.
I'm agreeing with the original statement, I prefer the "betas" over the Sigma Male Bros, just adding the nuance between "saying" someone has those characteristics and actually "having" those characteristics. Yes, the lowering of risk factors in the environment is an act of protection. All of that means nothing if the man isn't prepared to resist an attacker.
That's where I'm disagreeing. It has a protective value on its own, that is of higher practical use than mere brawn. Even if he's "just" watching the kids or keeping house, so that you can focus on maximizing your own income, you and the children are MUCH safer with him, than without him, because his presence allows you to have an overall safer existence.
It's also simply the fact that men who don't value women won't be inclined to protect them. Why should he? She's not special to him. The mere willingness to protect is half of the goal. Someone who looks like Rambo and has an arsenal at home, but doesn't love you, is more of a danger to you than a benefit.