I’ll teach my son to honor his father by working hard, not complaining too much and never to hit his sister. Stuff like that might even serve to “avenge” my father in a culture that wants my boy to be a girl. And I will “save my mother” by making sure she’s cared for in old age, partially with the intention that my son sees it and does the same for his mom. All very mundane perhaps. Being a husband has broader connotations than it may appear, but it’s how men derive meaning. It may mean being a warrior for a season and the guy who milks the cow and tills the field another. Just like a Viking. All conquest and no peace makes Jack a psychopath. Or a Comanche. There’s a reason they lost. They never built anything.

The true glory is the progeny and the culture that men protect and provide for. Without it, sound and fury signifying nothing. Serving women in this sacrificial way is honorable. It’s commanded in Eph 5 and Col 3 where St Paul calls men to love their wives.

A man without a woman to domesticate him is lost. He’s “merely” a killer and not a man. This may be an actual woman or the Church or his country. “Stand beside her and guide her…” as it were.

“Cuddling up” is one of the rewards of the husbandry I describe. But not the only one certainly. Pretty nice though. My point was that there’s a reason men have fallen for the lies of feminism. We find our higher purpose in “saving” our mothers and wives, so we respond to what they say they need. Maybe I would have signed. You might be right. I care about what women want and what they think. But I don’t think I’m quite the obsequious beta male you seem to imagine.