Feminism, Gynocentrism & Future Matriarchal Gynocracy: Different Types Of Societies & Feminist Zero Sum Game 1 & 2

By Yoav Levin: First of all let’s determine in anthropological terms the different types of societies in human history:
A) Matriarchal society: This is a society where both political, as well as informal power, is primarily in the hands of women. This type of society has never existed.
B) Patriarchal Society: This is a society where both the informal as well as the formal political power is in the hands of men. This type of society has also never existed.
C) Gynocentric society:
It is divided into:

1. Matrilineal: This society is one where either the inheritance or finances are almost solely distributed as well as family or religious lineage is based upon the mother. It is a power dynamic which basically reflects female informal power while the political formal power still stays in the hands of men. Therefore, informal and formal power is shared between men and women. The Mosuo in China and Judaism (especially in terms of religion as well as national lineage) are two examples.
2. Matrilocal: This society is one where the husband moves in with the wife’s family after marriage. Informal and formal political power is shared between men and women. There are a few such societies especially in the east (Tibet and India).
   
3. Matrifocal: This society is one where the mother and kids make the family unit, and the father plays a lesser role. Informal and formal political power is still shared between men and women.
   
4. Patrilineal: this is a society where either inheritance or financial redistribution of resources as well as the familial or religious lineage is primarily determined by the father. Informal and formal political power is shared between men and women. Historically, various patrilineal aspects were always included in all Gynocentric societies to balance the distribution of power between the sexes and to enable both a more harmonious society as well as relationships and marriages.
   
5. Patrifocal: This is a society where the husband with the children is the focus of family and the wife is less important. This type of society has also particularly never existed as it goes against the gynocentric nature of all primates including the human species.
   
6. Patrilocal: This is a society where the wife moves with the husband. Informal and formal political power is shared between men and women.
   

So going by accepted anthropological definitions, there is no known instances either today or in the past of any matriarchal or patriarchal society. There are merely examples of gynocentric matrilineal, matrilocal, matrifocal, patrilineal as well as patrilocal societies, but they are not the same thing.
The reasons why societies were defined in this or other ways were normally:

1. Evolution
2. Survival
3. Economical Scarcity and better survival in terms of economic planning and distribution of wealth
4. Balancing formal and informal power between men and women in relationships and society

Truth vs Myths

The History of Human Power Dynamics, Relations and Interactions in Society
Unlike the gigantic myths we’ve heard and the massive lies we’ve been told by feminists, when it comes to basic rights both in ancient history as well as in medieval times neither men nor women had any of them (or at least almost none). However, even in those times as we will see immediately if there was anything to gain for the poor masses of society it weas mainly women, not men, who could benefit and enjoy it. Yet, on the other side, when it comes to human rights like having the right to education, the right to vote and running businesses, it was women gaining them long before men could have dreamt of. Moreover, even during the colonial days of the US, women were groundbreaking in journalism and advertising. In the Encyclopedia of Women in American History we learn that the first person to ever own a printing press in 1638 was not a man but a woman. Her name was Elizabeth Glover of Cambridge MA. Additionally, there were also already 25 other women who ran newspapers and presses plus another 26 cases where a woman opened up her own firm with her own money. When we read further down, we also find out that a woman named Mary Katherine Goddard was chosen to be the first person to even print out the first copy of the Declaration of Independence of the US. Does this sound much like a patriarchal or even a patrilineal society to you? I don’t think so! All of this just shows and helps us not only to refute some of the massive lies we’ve been fed by feminist bureaucrats, officials, teachers, governments, schools and the mainstream media but it also enables us to demonstrate one of the basic principles of the matrifocal gynocentric society namely that not only that women are the privileged sex, not only that the society revolves around women but that they also always come before men and even prior to children. Consider for example that in a case of birth complications it is the mother but not the child that would be saved. Yes, I know, it is evolutionary feature of biological gynocentrism. Yes, I know, it is required for survival. Yet, it only emphasizes our observation that our society is neither patriarchal nor patrifocal but basically gynocentric and matrifocal.

The Right to Vote: Women Come First

As a part of their campaign of hatred, vindictiveness and incitement and in order to demonize and dehumanize men, one of the biggest lies and greatest myths spread by feminists on the basis of a selective, false and manipulative analysis of history is the infamous claim that men have exploited and oppressed women throughout history, denying them the right to vote while men lived a luxurious life and enjoyed every moment. As we have already seen above this is a not only false but an evil lie spread by feminist propaganda. Now, let’s examine and scrutinize this lie a little bit more. First, we should note that these lies are at the basis of the war of on men, boys and fathers. As part of joint state – feminist cooperation, this war is led by women’s organizations and is supported by governmental institutions that discriminate against men and boys in favor of girls and women. As we will see, men never oppressed, exploited or deprived women of the right to vote or allegedly any other right. Men simply lacked the power, rights and financial resources to do so. As women do today, men have also never abandoned them in the struggle for human and civil rights.
However, today as women embody the most privileged class in society, they misuse and abuse their power and abandon men who fought for it. Through the feminist war on men they attempt to take the matrifocal and gynocentric society and to establish a matrifocal gynocracy which is, in fact, nothing more than a tyrannical gynocentric matriarchy. Here it is important to note, as we shall see immediately, that until the 20th century no one had the right to vote. It wasn’t a matter of gender but rather of status. In practical terms, as explained below, women were given the right to vote before men. Especially those men who were sent into two world wars, without having a say about their destiny while women being safe at home could vote and send men to their deadly fate. Let’s look at the timeline of American history as an example of this dynamic which basically reflects again the matrifocal and gynocentric principle of putting women’s needs, rights and desires above those of everyone else which among other is also a derivative and an historical heritage of medieval chivalry and gynocentrism :

1. 1600 – women own businesses and assets
2. By 1867 most men could not vote due to property laws ensuring that only affluent men could have the voting right
3. 1870 The 15th Amendment of the US Constitution eliminates restrictions based on race/color regarding elections in the US
4. 1900 Property laws ensure that all women who own property can have voting rights
5. 1918 Men and women can vote – certain property laws still exist
6. 1920 Property laws are eliminated – the right to vote for everyone

Here, we should first bear in mind that women actually owned businesses from the middle Ages. As we have mentioned above already by the 17th century women were the first to own the printing and press businesses in the United States. It was long before the average man could dream of this. This data refutes the feminist lies about the discrimination and oppression of women by men or any imaginary patriarchy. It proves that being a (stay at home) mother, having a family or alternatively choosing a career were personal choices made by women. They were not oppressed, exploited, forced to do so by an evil patriarchy or ever abused by men. In fact, long before men had any economic or political rights, women were already in positions of economic, political as well as societal power, they were influencing public opinion through the press and the advertising tools they owned, while the only right men had at that time was to be sent to wars, be slaughtered on the battlefields, to serve as cannon fodder for women, and to return home in pieces.
Women also inherited the husbands wealth so that not only half of the husband’s money and resources, as we will see below, but up to 70% were in the hands of women. Even though women did not work for it! As I said and will elaborate in detail in the next paragraphs women in the early 20th century also controlled between 70 to 80 percent of the nation’s wealth – something that is true even today in “patriarchal India”! It is also important to remember that during the colonial period, prior to the establishment of the American federation, the vote was reassigned to the head of the family in most states in the US. Women, as well as men, had no voting rights in the original 13 colonies, but it was only because of the original British voting system that required ownership of land and assets to be able to vote in elections, which did not exist for most poor and average men too. Thus, even men who did not own land and assets were not allowed to vote in the United States. However, if the man was not available for voting for any reason, then the woman would vote for him. In addition, whether there were no male heirs and the woman inherited the property or vice versa she actually had her own property without having the need to inherit it (as we have seen this was possible already from the 17th century), she could have voted as the owner of the property too. As more and more colonies (and territories) joined the Union, they automatically granted women the right to vote. In the amendment concerning universal suffrage, the Fifteenth Amendment to the 1870 Constitution, there were more women in the United States who had the right to vote than men. This is also most probably reflected in the electoral system of the US elections that presumably evolved from the family level to the communal one. Moreover, it should be also noted that feminists opposed the right to vote for men and in general for all minorities including women for purely racist reasons. The origin of modern feminism is in the American Ku Klux Klan. Based on the WKKK ideal feminists were in favor of the right to vote but solely for white women.
Those who initiated the change were all conservatives but not liberals (including the feminists). Therefore, the right to vote for women is not the result of the feminist struggle, but rather the continuation of the conservative fight for civil rights for everyone. Women were given the right to vote before most of the men were given this right as a part of this struggle.
From here we can learn and draw a number of conclusions:

1. The right to vote for women was guaranteed even before the feminist movement was established and allegedly began to fight for the right to vote.
2. Women, as well as men, did not receive the right to vote because of the partisan activity of the feminist movement that promoted selective rights for women (and not for the entire population) but it was good men who fought for the right to vote (as well as many other civil rights) for everyone including women.
   
3. (Affluent) Women received the right to vote before the majority of (poor) men.
   
4. At the time of the 15th Amendment of the American Constitution, more women than men had the right to vote and later most women and men received the right to vote together
   
5. Women worked and therefore owned businesses long before the twentieth century and the emergence of the feminist movement. This also isn’t the result of a feminist struggle.
   
6. Similar to Europe, where the process was spread over a period of several decades and at the same time, the right to vote for women as well as men were not established by feminists but was granted to everyone as a part of a wider struggle for human and civil rights for everyone. A struggle led by men and not by feminists. In two bloody war men who were sent to their death by affluent women (who could already vote) paid the price for those human and civil rights with their own life. It was not women.
   

To sum it up: Although men never abandoned women and always treated them like everyone else in the struggle for civil rights, women’s organizations today have uncovered their true face. Today, women have betrayed men as well as the agreement and social contract that existed between the sexes so now when men demand true equality – in parenthood, career, work, health, law, recognition of their contribution to society and their suffering – women and especially feminists have stabbed them in the back. Today women are not fighting for equality, but for privileged status in society and female supremacy.

Source




Part 2

By Yoav Levin:

The Redistribution of Financial Resources: It’s All About Women – Economic Gynocentrism and how it Works to Exploit Men

Additionally, according to studies conducted in the US, as early as in 1931 the number of female millionaires was identical to the number of male millionaires. This was the case even though the rate of participation of women in the labor force was then under 40 percent. During the said period, women also constituted the majority of the shareholders of the large corporations and in addition, they constituted between 35 and 40 percent of the customers of the investment bonds. Moreover, as early as 1951, women controlled 70% of national wealth, although they still constituted less than 50% of the labor force.
Accordingly, women also constitute the majority of purchasing power. This is the period of time that the feminist liars of gender studies have declared greedy and egotistical men to be the exploiters of women only concerned with taking all of their money for themselves and oppressing them. Ask yourself the following question? What group or another oppressed class in history has worked fewer hours than the oppressive class yet dominated most of the national wealth, 70 percent of the big corporations, held between 35 to 40 percent of the investment bonds and constituted the majority of the purchasing power in the economy?
As a result, we can conclude, among other things, that women could have actually not only in theory run the entire domestic sphere of affairs in the decision-making centers of the formal power, but they actually do so even without the need to be present there, based on their combined economic strength, while they also control all the informal power positions and while the percentage of men in the formal positions of power is only a small and insignificant fraction of all men. In such cultural and societal conditions men at the centers of decision-making and formal power have no choice but to surrender and submit to the dictates of women’s organizations and feminist lobbies.
We are talking about puppets in a theater that are guided by these lobbies and organizations. That’s the reason why we are witnessing a dynamic where it does not matter what the political worldview of those men at the position of power is because they will always surrender to these dictates. In order to do the dirty work, there is no need for women to be in key positions, but it is enough that men who lack a backbone will submit to the dictates of feminists. In this way women’s organization and feminist lobbies achieve three main objectives:
A) Their policy is implemented;
B) They do not have to do the dirty work and therefore publicly they always appear clean and good;
C) They can continue to incite against men;
Thus it is another classical feature of matrifocal gynocentrism: the formal power is left to men, yet without the informal power which is in the hand of women it’s worth nothing. Thus male power as already acknowledged by Warren Farell and Carol Rogers is nothing but a myth and delusion. It’s also a taboo and one upon which all of the matrifocal gynocentric construct is built and rests.
The main thing here is that according to the narrative of the fake news media, the ignorance of our pseudo academy promotes nothing but stupidity and dismal science alongside the false historical feminist narrative. This is the garbage we learn in school, universities and media, namely that women are buried in poverty by greedy men and that all men are pigs, rapists and patriarchal abusers. Moreover, through the laws of inheritance and divorce, it is apparent that this claim is nothing more than a fraud and an illusion. In fact, the divorce and inheritance law makes sure that the men serve as tools for transferring resources from men to women with the aim at enriching them even if the woman does not work even one single day.
This is the basic dynamic that is identical everywhere in the world. Think (hypothetically) about a woman who does not work a single day in her life. She is married to a man. This woman profits from divorce in at least three principal channels: real estate (apartment or house), social benefits, property, child support, alimony and many more. Moreover, on the day she divorces her husband, she would receive half of the house, half of his pension, half the provident funds, half executive insurance, and half the business (if there is any). The husband will receive little if it is the woman that holds them.
The meaning of this is not only that the definition of what the husband earns in a marriage is not his own but half of it is also hers but actually the husband owns less than half the ownership of his assets and resources already from the “get go” while the woman is in a possession of at least seventy to eighty percent of family assets and resources from the same starting point. This is the shortest explanation of the gynocentric inheritance and divorce laws. They may alternate between different countries but the basic dynamic is identical.
Moreover, it is important to understand that the law is written in a way that on its surface reflects equality, but is, in reality, a gigantic fraud. What is important is the interpretation, not the written law itself. In practical terms, even though the law is written on an equal footing, the deception is carried out by the fact that while the formal power is changing in favor of women there is no change in the informal power to balance it in favor of men. Yet, inheritance and divorce laws are all based on the informal power and not vice versa. Therefore, even if a woman for example earns more still in general calculation the man has to pay and to transfer all of his resources to the woman. Therefore, in practical terms, women pursuing careers and working outside the home do not ostensibly serve equally in the sense of reducing the burden put on men to provide for the family, but on the contrary it weighs on it, as he will continue to serve as a tool for transferring money, assets and resources and for the economic exploitation of men.
In a matrifocal and gynocentric society, women pursuing careers and working outside the home are therefore not really working towards equality but rather for greater economic exploitation of men. The feminist fables and tales about patriarchy, the exploitation of women and so forth are nothing but false – both historically and in factual reality of modern day to day life. The real situation is exactly the opposite! Feminists claim that feminism is good for all, that traditional gender roles are bad for men, that they hurt them, that this everything is toxic masculinity; that women going to work will help to reduce the burden of men providing for the family. In fact, just as in everything else feminism claims and feminists say this is nothing more than fraud and lies.
Feminism is not really about changing the traditional gender roles, but rather exploiting them even more. In the favor of women, of course! Not only will the man according to feminist gender roles continue to serve as breadwinner but now the burden of providing will only increase until he becomes a slave and even worse a mere subservient and subordinated tool to his wife. Feminists are also not interested in changing the gender roles of the man as a knight who protects women. Today, they limit that role and ask the men by “affirmative action”. Which, as we have seen, is not intended to correct anything but to radicalize the situation, to give up all the positions of formal power so that women can control men even more through the long dreamed of matriarchy. And there is the man’s role as a sperm donor. And that’s why, exactly for this purpose, all the dynamics and laws described above were put in place.
The bottom line, in such a matrifocal Gynocentric society, is that men are exploited merely as cash machines. The economic reality for men means that and even with joint-spending on fathers and children, women still spend more money on themselves than the shared father-offspring spending. This can even be observed in the floor space allocated to women’s products in malls and shopping centers actually designed for men.
Men also earn 25% the income of a woman due to her working shorter hours, less difficult and dangerous jobs but her spending 90% more money than she makes. Women earn around 38.5% of the household’s income but spend 75% of its domestic spending. Men earn around 61.5% of all income but only account for 25% of spending. Men only spend 40% of what they earn after tax. In case of divorce women got more than 70% of all resources while fathers less than 30%. This is real exploitation; and this is real sexism. This characteristic which puts the female needs and desires about everyone else’s including the children is the basic property and dynamic of a Gynocentric matrifocal society where men and children are mere tools and designed to serve women. Gynocentric society is therefore the embodiment of female supremacy aiming at exploiting not only men but children too.
To create such an extremely female-focused environment, this kind of matrifocal Gynocentric society exploits and takes advantage of the basic evolutionary condition that every human being – man, woman and children – have been raised and instilled with a woman’s point of view from birth. This is called Gynocentrism 0:1 and it is an evolutionary feature also existing in all primates. However, taking advantage of that condition, in the matrifocal society the Gynocentric ideology conditions men through social engineering to give women special treatment from birth and women are taught to expect privileged treatment from men. The matrifocal gynocentrism as a social construct is by definition a supremacist ideology. However, it has become the default social model for most of the societies on the planet. Men are trained to suppress emotions and always be considerate of a woman’s feelings, men are trained to sacrifice, work and die to provide for women’s happiness. They are trained to be socially subordinated slaves to their wives and other women in their life.
Furthermore, men and women are also trained to always take the woman’s side over a man no matter how wrong she is and the man is right. Additionally, women are taught to support each other and view men’s pain and suffering as less important. Men are indoctrinated in doing the opposite while dismissing, ignoring and suppressing their own pain and suffering. Men are taught that fighting, dying and sacrificing themselves is noble but women experiencing, that any emotional distress is terrible and that their pain and suffering is invalid! This sexist attitude and female brainwashing has seen men literally dying to protect women who quite often take the sacrifices men make completely for granted. This is again real sexism and it is taught at a very early age and reinforced in our society through media, academia (pseudo-science) education and legal system.
This is the reason that all of the ancient Gynocentric cultures prior to societies having gynocentrim 0:2 as a social construct and ideology were a combination and a mixture of matrilineal, matrilocal, matrifocal as well as patrilineal and patrilocal elements within the Gynocentric societies. Even gynocentrism 0:2 still exhibited such kind of alternating combinations and variations. Feminism, namely gynocentrim 0:3, which is a derivative of Gynocentric ideology and society aims at creating a matriarchal society by destroying the traditional balance and harmony between men and women in the context of older Gynocentric cultures. It should be achieved by shifting all of the formal power from men to women while keeping the informal power in the hands of women too. This is the feminist end goal and the zero-sum game.

Further Reading

No Misandry blog
Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis

Source