the Normal Person* and the Savants* thinking males and rules

Before I describe the ideal male (of 2o17), I’ll describe the difference in thinking and reacting to rules and regulations, that are, sometimes an inseparable part of a man’s life. Because the military is such a male institution and driven by strict rules and hirarchy, I’ll use that as an example of how the Normal Person* and the Savants* thinking men react to rules in general.

• the Normal Person* thinking men find rules and regulations reassuring. They like being told what to do because that leaves second-guessing out of the equation. They like rules because otherwise, they feel lost and without an external structure. The rules in the general society are often vague and ever-changing, and thus confusing and unnerving to the Normal Person* (in general).
• the Savants* thinking men find fitting into rules and regulations a challenge. They tend to have a mind of their own, so they find it an exciting thought to try and fit themselves into something strict and limiting that they don’t quite find comfortable.
• The Normal Person* aim to make things simpler for themselves (“I’ll join the military, my life’s work (and thinking) is done.”) While the Savants* are trying to make things harder for themselves for the challenge of it. (“I’ll sacrifice myself for the sake of the country, I will subject myself to a regime that will challenge me, and I will do my very best to serve my country.”)
• the Savants* thinking men don’t usually mind unclear rules, and like to think on their feet, thus making better officers than the Normal Person*, once they get there, because they are able to make independent decisions based on the information available, something that the Normal Person* would be too unsure to do regardless of the level of his training. Therefore military should never be lead by the Normal Person*, who will always be looking for a superior to fall back on.
• the Normal Person* don’t like an expectation they cannot fulfill, but they are also unwilling to admit that they can’t perform at the demanded level and tend to find a lot of excuses to explain their lack of success, and tend to demand lowering standards for them, insisting that the standards are too high if they cannot fulfill them.
• the Savants*, when they no longer can fulfill an expectation will find it a relief of sorts. They know how high they should go and they feel a level of satisfaction in finding their limit. Their limits are not easily met, so when they find someone more skilled and talented than them, they feel inspired and relieved to an extent, and they always respect those who they acknowledge as their superior. Their loyalty towards someone who they truly trust and respect is unquestioned, and filled with love and devotion.
• the Normal Person* do not feel that way towards their superior,  they do not look for a superior based on their skills, but their level of stubbornness, and, in some case, violence, the level of force and that the superior is willing to use to make others submit to their will. A superior officer that will haze the troops is the Normal Person*. The Savants* may do that to an extent because it’s the army way, but be much more demanding of real skill and ability and less demanding of obedience, and punish only when a punishment is truly due. The Normal Person* may demand idiotic tasks to be performed just to test obedience and loyalty, while to a Savants*, this feels absolutely unnecessary and unduly demeaning.
• Further, when a Savants* finds themselves out of their depth, they try to fulfill the expectations for a time, until they find that they will not be able to regardless of how hard they try. At this point, they will ask for a discharge or reassignment to duties more in alignment with their skills. They are acutely aware of their responsibility and the risk they put others under should they pretend to be more capable than what they are, and take pride in knowing their own strengths and weaknesses before they are discovered by finding someone who depends on their professionalism dead or permanently injured.
• A Normal Person* rarely accepts or admits when they are out of their depth and will rely on their luck to not be discovered to be incapable to fulfil their duties. They allocate taks they don’t know how to perform to other people (usually the Savants*) and try to pass the buck of responsibility that way should they ever get caught for not knowing how to perform their own duty.
• If the Normal Person* give the rookies nicknames, they do it in order to anonymize them. The Normal Person* are always thinking about each other’s families, nobody is nothing but somebody’s father, someone’s son, and someone’s brother, and using their last name reminds them of the fact this man has a family. To be renamed by the Normal Person* means they want to keep your family out of it. The Savants* never think about the person’s family in any other context as a continuation to the individual they are dealing with. If a Savants* gives another man a nickname, it is to highlight them as one of their loved ones – the opposite of what the Normal Person* does.
• To the Normal Person*, the anonymity of military life is a relief, to a Savants*, a pain. The Normal Person* would be happy to be called by a number, while the Savants* would hate that and rebel against it with all their might. (Should a Savants* be happy about not using their own name, it simply speaks of deep wrath towards their family which they wish to distance themselves from – probably the Normal Person* thinking family or a family member.)
• The Normal Person*’s  mind goes numb in the military to an extent. They follow rules and orders without a second thought. They do exactly as they are told if they are able. This is a relief to them, as they find life in general confusing. A life with no questions is a life of bliss.
• The Savants* cannot help but second guess every order (but they do this quickly and silently and nobody will notice). They follow orders as a personal challenge. They are acutely aware of their responsibility and honor as a soldier and do their very best to comply until they are asked to do something that goes against EVERYTHING they believe to be right and just, and according to a code, or as a direct violation to the military code of practise or honor, or against the overall mission. They’ll refuse at the risk of dishonorary relief of duty.
• An Savant* thinking whistleblower is someone who TRULY feels a code has been violated, and badly. They do their duty by reporting it in a way that is appropriate. Any coverups of wrong-doing are done by the Normal Person*, to whom appearances are always more important than how things actually are. A Normal Person* thinking whistleblower is someone who thinks whistleblowers are important and exciting and want to try what that feels like, or he has something personal to gain from it.
• The Savants* may rebel against a punishment if he feels it is completely out of line and undue. A Normal Person* may rebel against a punishment if he feels it is too lenient and that his leader shows weakness in applying a too weak a punishment. (the Normal Person*/the Savants* combination in these things is a volatile combo.) An Savant* who repeatedly applies too weak punishments on the Normal Person*, will lose the respect of his the Normal Person* thinking men, and the opposite is also true; A Normal Person* who repeatedly uses too strong punishments will lose the respect of his the Savants* thinking men, but the Savants* deal with this in a more mature manner than the Normal Person* do, most likely taking it to a superior officer through official routes. (If the superior officer is the Normal Person*, the complaint will be ignored despite regulations.)
• The Savants* thinking men, as already mentioned are acutely aware of the responsibility of their work, and although they are always second-guessing themselves, they are able to make sound decisions quickly and on their feet, partly because of their continual habit of looking at all possible angles before making decisions. The Normal Person*, once they have to think outside the clear rule book will find themselves at loss and making random decisions that they enforce by brutal force and denial of responsibility because they are unable to make sound decisions even when they have a long time to think about it.
• The Savants* are idealists and they fully understand the purpose of the military. The Normal Person* are always following a role that they wish to fill, but they don’t always fully grasp the meaning of the military (or any other organization) and need catch phrases to fall back on to explain the purpose of anything. One test to determine the way a person thinks is to give them a complex piece of text and then ask them to explain what they read in their own words. The Savants* are able to do this, the Normal Person* will try to memorize sentences of what they just read and repeat them, perhaps slightly altering them to fulfill the command of “in your own words”. The Savants* will add a lot of their own personality, perhaps include a personal anecdote to explain what they read, but the Normal Person* will try to simplify the answer and their answer is typically a lot shorter than the Savants*’s.
• A Normal Person* thinking male is not comfortable with female soldiers UNLESS it has been made clear to them that the females are a part of the team now and that’s all there is to it. The Normal Person* thinking men would have been the loudest to oppose the idea in the first place however, because they are creatures of habit and hate change of any kind. “This is the way it has always been done” is their motto. An Savant* may oppose a female nomination to a task that she is unlikely to be able to perform to an acceptable standard, even if that was due to her gender. An Savant* will feel uneasy whenever a role is given to a person who is not equipped to handle it with confidence, skill and professionalism, and sadly, as far as female the Normal Person* go… They should not be in the military, period, because they are ALWAYS THERE as a feminist statement, not to serve the country. The Savants* thinking females will hold themselves to the same standard as men would, but would quit easier than the Normal Person* thinking females to whom appearances (and the showing of stubborness) matter more than their responsibility to the other soldiers. They do not consider the fact their incompetence will cost male lives – male lives do not matter to them that much, but female lives do. The Savants* thinking men will always stay justifiably uneasy with the Normal Person* thinking female soldiers.

How to use this in a military setting:

• Always, if possible, keep the Normal Person* separate from the Savants*, and know how they operate.
• This will sound awful but use the Normal Person* thinking troops as cannon food, and send the Savants* on missions that require independent thinking in high-risk areas.
• Well-trained the Normal Person* are straight forward, rule-following, robots. Their missions should be similar, and their leader should be a Savants* who takes no crap and is not there to make friends. Someone with a healthy level of disrespect towards his troops – can be found among the Savants*, but avoid deeply emotional idealists that love their friends too much. (They will find the Normal Person* thinking troop too child-like to take seriously or to send out to do a dangerous task that they feel they are taing on without thinking or even having properly understood what they signed up for and will find putting themselves at risk while protecting their men.)

Subscribe to get a Daily Message