Why Gynocentrism is Good

The below are Fidelbogen’s definitions of gynocentrism and gynonormativism:

Counter Snippets
By Fidelbogen
January 23, 2013

Gynocentrism is the practice of placing women’s safety, comfort and general well-being at the center of social or political concern, and structuring life in the objective service of such interests. It extends no further than that, and would NOT include placing the feminine point of view at the center of one’s worldview. That is to say, gynocentrism does not violate the boundary of inner space by requiring a person (male in particular) to think and feel a certain way. In sum, gynocentrism is not totalitarian.

Gynonormativism goes the extra step. Using gynocentrism as a foundation, gynonormativism prioritizes the feminine point of view hierarchically within the culture, on both a political and interpersonal level, and pressures males in particular to adopt a feminine system of values as a component of one’s authentic personality. In this manner, gynonormativism is totalitarian. We would understand feminism as a gynonormative project, while acknowledging that it could not have come into operation without a preexisting base of gynocentricity in the traditional culture.

Gynonormativization is integral to the establishment of female supremacy.”

Though I do not endorse Fidelbogen’s views on gender relations, he is a Men’s Rights Activist, I do think his above definitions of gynocentrism and gynonormativism make sense. Gynocentrism is equivalent to patriarchy while gynonormativism is equivalent to feminism. To rephrase things “Patriarchy is the practice of placing women’s safety, comfort and general well-being at the center of social or political concern, and structuring life in the objective service of such interests.” Yes, that sounds good; that sounds like an accurate description of what patriarchy is. It is certainly what patriarchy is meant to be. Notice the emphasis on doing things “in the objective service” of women. This means that the interests of women are to be served based on the basis of objective criteria, based on what is truly in the woman’s interest, not based on what the woman wants or demands. It is the man that makes the judgments regarding what is in the woman’s best interest. Patriarchy is about male authority in the interests of women; male authority to better meet women’s needs.

There is a vital assumption underlying the practice of patriarchy being focused on women’s needs and women’s interests; that is that the needs of women and the needs of children are aligned. The underlying purpose of elevating women is to provide for and protect and nurture children. If for some reason the woman’s interests and the child’s interest conflict then the patriarchy will side against the woman in favor of the child. Patriarchy is most fundamentally in the service of children, women are elevated in patriarchy due to their association with children.

Patriarchy is gynocentric because men are gynocentric. Patriarchy is an expression of men’s desire and men’s nature. Men are the ones who create and maintain patriarchy and establish the rules of the patriarchal social system. It is therefore obvious and clear that patriarchy is an expression of men’s nature. It is a part of a man’s nature to be enthralled by women, to be in love with women, to find women very interesting, to seek the approval of women, to want to be able to think of himself as being good to women, to be heroic in women’s eyes, to be admired by women, and to control women. To a man fellow men are partners and peers and collaborators and competitors but they are not the basis of a higher calling that a man will direct his energies to. A man will not automatically feel protective towards another man just because he is a man; that is because in an ordinary situation the man is independent and self-sufficient and doing his own thing. When men work together even where there is a definite hierarchy among the men the men will be working together to achieve a common purpose outside of themselves and beyond themselves. When a man interacts with a woman however the man will automatically take on a protective stance towards the woman and will be oriented towards how he can be of assistance to the woman because the man will assume that the woman is in need of his help, guidance, and support. In this sense a man is automatically going to be gynocentric since his orientation is towards the well being of women, not towards the well being of other men.

A social structure should be gynocentric because it is the maintenance and support of the family unit that is a society’s highest priority and women are the ones who are the primary responsible agents within the home. Women are the ones in closest proximity to children meaning that to support the child support first has to be directed towards the woman such that the woman will then use the resources given to her to then support the child. Even though children are the ultimate intended beneficiaries of the patriarchal social system support and priority cannot be directly assigned to the child because the child is incompetent to decide upon their own needs and most of the child’s needs are emotional and social anyways where an adult is needed to provide for these social and emotional needs. If a social system prioritized the needs and interests of men that would make no sense because in that situation resources would be directed towards the sex that had a lower level of contact with children leading to such resources being largely wasted. Only a gynocentric social system makes sense because when resources are directed towards women these resources then effectively and efficiently serve the interests of children.

Things however go wrong when a society goes from being gynocentric to being gynonormative; when a society goes from being patriarchal to feminist. This is because the person who provides the resources has to also be the one who decides how the resources are used so that the incentive to continue providing the resources will be maintained. In a gynocentric culture the man acts on the woman’s behalf, in a gynonormative culture the man acts under the woman’s direction. When a man is acting based on his own values and his own initiative in order to achieve goals he has established for himself then his incentive to provide for the woman is secure and stable. If the man however is acting under the direction of the woman to provide for the woman according to what she wants and according to what her priorities are then the man has only a minimal incentive to provide for the woman because the man’s goals will only be furthered when there happens to be an alignment between the man’s and the woman’s goals. In addition the woman will not know what cost upon the man her demands impose since she is not the one bearing the cost of the benefit she desires. In other words she will not be able to judge how costly what she requests of the man is for the man to provide. There is also a free rider problem where the woman may make demands of the man that yield only a small benefit to her but impose a large cost upon the man simply because to her the benefit is free since it is the man who is providing the benefit. All of these conflicts that arise from the provider of the benefit, the man, not being in control of how the benefit is used leads to the man’s resources and investment in his family being wasted. The man then experiences this wastage of his resources as being abusive to him and in response withdraws from investing in his family in order to avoid being disadvantaged and victimized.

The end result is that the patriarchal system maintains men’s investment in women and in family life allowing for a prosperous society while the feminist system destroys men’s investment in family life leading to family breakdown and deterioration.

Gynocentrism is a natural expression of men’s love towards women and is a healthy positive thing. What is important is that the man retain control of the family situation so that his sense of leadership and purpose within the family can be maintained.

About Jesse Powell TFA

Anti-Feminist, MRA, Pro-Traditional Women's Rights Traditional Family Activist (TFA)
This entry was posted in Patriarchy, Philosophy and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to Why Gynocentrism is Good

  1. Pingback: Uncle Tims and White Knights Protecting Women from MRAs | Secular Patriarchy

  2. mamaziller says:

    I agree completely! If patriarchy is gynocentrism it is balanced gynocentrism. It is female centered and does elevate the life of women above that of men but that is because ultimately it is also very child centered.

    MRAs view gynocentrism as some type of evil done to men. In exactly the same way feminists view patriarchy. Can’t society focus on women and men at the same time? To me traditionalism done properly, does that. You are right that that is why men must lead though. They take the risks and make the most sacrifice in the traditional setting and so they deserve the rewards of that sacrifice.

    You know the thing is I could live with feminism and all their complete BS if they would just leave traditional minded people alone. They preach liberalism and choice but they do not want choice. They make fun of how we think, bash how we think, call it BS, and continuously try too change society so that is becomes not a place of choice but a place of what they call equality.

    Women and men made their choice a long time ago, feminism simply did not accept that choice. Thanks for you comment on my post by the way and I hope you are well!! :0)

    • Simon Masbaum says:

      My only contention is that I think the MRM is more concerned with gynonormativity. Fighting gynocentrism seems to be more of a MGTOW thing.

  3. Thanks for your comment. There is one thing you said though that I want to take issue with. You said “You know the thing is I could live with feminism and all their complete BS if they would just leave traditional minded people alone.” There is something you should understand. Feminism and traditionalism are not equal to each other; traditionalism is better. One might say two consenting adults have the right to live together as they chose but there is still the problem that feminism is harmful to children and feminist adults don’t have the right to impose their pathological lifestyle on their children. Adults are not superior to children and adult interests do not come before children’s interests as feminism teaches. So basically traditionalism is good and feminism is bad; there is no way around this.

    Also, people like to think that however they are living is the best way to live or the right way to live. In other words people will always have a tendency to downgrade or insult how other people are living if those other people are not living in the way they are living because the way they are living is best. You will notice how working mothers or career women always like to insult and degrade stay-at-home mothers? This is because the career woman thinks being a career woman is superior simply as a reflection of them wanting to value their own choices in life and to claim the moral high ground for themselves. Two different behavioral choices are never equal and people know this; this is why the choice of the other person must always be inferior to ones own choice. When two different people are doing two different things one of them is doing it wrong; namely the other person. For this basic psychological reason the feminist will always seek to insult and downgrade the traditional woman and try to drive everyone into the feminist way of doing things because after all the feminist way is superior (according to them).

    Another thing, there is only one law. By nature the law, whatever it is, applies to everyone. The law is necessarily one size fits all as everybody is supposed to obey the law, the same laws. The law will either be designed to assist and facilitate a feminist model of family life or the law will be designed to assist and facilitate a traditional model of family life. One set of laws cannot facilitate both models of family life as the assumptions underlying the different models of family life are different. The law has to chose, the law has to discriminate. The law can favor feminism or the law can favor traditionalism but the law cannot support and favor both feminism and traditionalism at the same time because the assumptions of feminism and the assumptions of traditionalism are in conflict with each other.

    So basically the way to resolve this is to assert that traditionalism (or patriarchy) is good and feminism is bad. Traditionalism should be praised and admired; feminism should be shunned and attacked. The law should support traditionalism; the law should not be accommodating to feminism. Traditionalism and feminism are not equal; traditionalism is superior.

    This may sound harsh but it is the reality of the situation.

    • mamaziller says:

      Thank you for the reply. I fully agree that traditionalism is better. I am a traditionalist and I chose traditionalism because I think it is better, not just for society or children but also for individuals and adults. I think that I have lived in a liberal society (Jamaica). Family court laws often are not enforced because the police force is simply not equip to deal with issues at this level (they are not even properly enforcing murder laws and the like).

      So I have seen what liberalism, a lack of laws, and a broken family system does. If you value life and any type of economic prosperity the results of this set up are not for you.

      At the same time though everything I think is based on the idea that we are all biased (including me), we are all a little different, and no one way is the ultimate and only way. I hate it when feminists bash traditionalism so I think I should given them the same respect and not bash them. It is hard, I’ll admit because they do not make logical sense to me. But they obviously make sense to themselves and I do not make logical sense to them so I think for the sake of peace and happiness we owe each other tolerance.

      Also to me traditionalism is under attack on a cultural level. We have feminists and liberals arguing that all types of sexuality need to be accepted in children, that we should promote sexual experimentation of our children with both boys and girls, or grow them up bisexual. We have people claiming that slut shaming is a form of misogyny without acknowledging that the idea that children came from sex had something to do with slut shaming. We have women (including myself) growing up with a distorted version of gender roles historically, and being told that all men are evil, abusive and controlling and to never let a man have economic power over you. That has to change before we can even think about laws as far as I see it.

      About the laws and liberalism, we live in a democracy, I am not opposed to laws that favor the family, in fact if it was all up to me those would be the laws BUT only if they align with the cultural reality. So I am opposed to laws that people do not want and that do not align with our cultural reality. The current cultural reality is liberal so it makes sense to have liberal laws. If women are free to work and get affirmative action etc. and do consider themselves equal then it makes sense that they do not get alimony, that they share custody and so on. I personally do not want that life for women (or children!) but while we live in this cultural reality it is what makes sense, it is what is fair.

      I do not see women as being the same as men and would prefer the culture not to give us the same access to jobs that they give to men but I do acknowledge that that is the world we live in and that the laws should match our cultural reality. If we change the cultural reality to one where it is OKAY to be a woman whose focus is children, where it is okay that women do not work outside the home as much as men, were it is okay to be a traditional woman and where no one makes a fuss about women not being politicians etc. then I can support non liberal laws (or older laws). The social pressure put on women to excel in the masculine sphere of life has to change first and then we can vote against liberalism. Cultural change has to come first!

      I agree we need to praise traditionalism and give logical reason why we oppose feminism or think that it is unhealthy for society. I think it is not as good as traditionalism because traditionalism leads to a more successful society. Equality that feminists SAY they want can also lead to a successful society in theory, but the “equality” that feminists practice will lead to failed relationships and a culture unable to sustain a working family unit.

      • Judithann Campbell says:

        Hello, Mamaziller 🙂 I get the feeling that you are saying, “Why can’t we just live and let live?”, and I think many people share that sentiment. The reason we shouldn’t be accepting towards feminism is because feminists treat children badly; if you don’t believe this, visit my post on my site titled, “Does Anyone Care How the Children of Working Mothers Feel?” There you will see a comment by a working mother who brags about the fact that she could have cared less if her working made her children unhappy. Why should I care one iota how she feels, if she doesn’t care how her children feel? Why would I-why should I-try to get along with such a woman?

        In order to get along with feminists, we must ignore the way they treat their children: we must agree with them that their children’s happiness shouldn’t be anyone’s concern. Feminists have abandoned children; anyone who wants to get along with them must also abandon children. Feminists will accuse their critics of being very cruel, and then they will tell their children to shut up and stop whining. So who is really being cruel?

        MRAs are also abandoning children; they think that women who want to devote themselves to children are being cruel to men. They want women to abandon children in order to make life easier for men. I agree with MRAs about one or two things; for instance, I am against affirmative action for women, but notice: MRAs virtually never talk about affirmative action. They spend virtually all of their time attacking traditional women; they hate women far more than they care about other men, if they even care about other men at all. In the world of men’s rights, affirmative action is low hanging fruit: if they were serous about making life better for men, that is the issue they would focus on, but they prefer to just spew hatred.

        Traditionalists believe that adults should sacrifice for children; both feminists and MRAs believe that children are the ones who should sacrifice for adults. We should not-we cannot-make nice with people who are not willing to sacrifice for their own children, and even if we did make nice with them, it wouldn’t work: they would only turn around and stab us in the back. We have absolutely nothing to gain from being tolerant of feminists and MRAs.

      • mamaziller says:

        Hi Judithann thanks for your comment and I read the article on working mothers. My trouble is that I simply cannot bash others for being different. I can disagree with them and tell them why I am the way I am. I can ask them not to bash me, I can logically show why what I do makes sense.

        We can both agree that as far as we see having their mothers near by is better for both children and mothers. We can both agree that the family unit, a complete family unit is great for society. We can agree that the traditional way is better and that as far as we see the feminist way will not lead to something good for most people involved.

        But they still deserve respect, they still deserve to be argued with in a logical way, to be listened to and reasoned with and not bashed. If feminists would state logical reasons why traditionalism is bad, I can handle that because then I can show them where I think they are wrong. If they would show a basic amount of respect for traditionalism then I think we can have progress.

        It is the emotional calling us sexist and bigots that I can not handle. It is the emotional practice of not listening to us but simply labeling us as they think we are (evil and closeminded). I have written a blog to explain why I think traditionalism is better and why I think feminism and MRAs are wrong. I tried not to insult them or bash them and to give credit to their experiences while writing. As far as I can see Jesse and you do this as well. You all give reasons why feminism is harmful.

        Feminists do not give reasons why traditionalism is bad, because they have no respect at all for traditionalism. To them it is not worth explaining they just say if you are sexist: screw you.

        Also I am okay with some mothers working even if it is harmful to children, I think if the majority of society is traditional then the society can absorb the negatives caused there. But a healthy society at least has the majority being traditional.

        It is a complicated issue for me, it is not so easy to choose a side. I know that I am a trditionalist, I do not know much else. I know traditionalism is better for me. I know it seems better for most people that I know. I know that I will suuport traditionalism where I can. But I can not say that it is best in every situation for every human. I think it is better for society and for the majority.

        Some people may be better in a feminists world though. Anyway thanks for your considern, yes it is not an issue with a clear answer for me.. but I do support traditionalism as a valid and good lifestyle choice. And I do want to help fight againsts feminism and for traditionalism.

  4. You say “no one way is the ultimate and only way.” I disagree with this; at least I disagree in terms of broad concepts. Yes there are small variations from individual to individual and small variations from one time or society to another but in general there is only one “truth.” This is what objective morality is all about, this is what I mean when I talk about ones duty to “obey the Superior Power.” There is a general life plan that is or should be the norm; that general life plan being traditionalism or patriarchy.

    You say “I hate it when feminists bash traditionalism so I think I should given them the same respect and not bash them.” The problem is; feminism and traditionalism are not equal. Traditionalism deserves respect while feminism doesn’t. A feminist bashing traditionalism is just telling lies while a traditionalist bashing feminism is simply describing the world as it is and telling the truth. Lies are not equal to the truth so there is no moral equivalence between the feminist bashing the traditionalist and the traditionalist bashing the feminist.

    You say “Equality that feminists SAY they want can also lead to a successful society in theory, but the “equality” that feminists practice will lead to failed relationships and a culture unable to sustain a working family unit.” I think what you’re saying here is that feminism based on true gender equality without the anti-male biases feminism is associated with in reality would work in theory. I disagree with you on this. You are saying that the harm of feminism is based on the anti-male discriminatory elements of feminism in practice. I disagree with you on this. The harm of feminism is not anti-male bias, the harm of feminism is female empowerment. You can have female empowerment without anti-male bias but you cannot have female empowerment without male disinvestment. Female empowerment causes male disinvestment inevitably and it is male disinvestment that is harmful. Men being treated fairly while they abandon women is disastrous because men abandoning women is disastrous regardless of whether men are being treated fairly or not. Fairness is a secondary issue; male investment in women is the primary issue.

    Feminism is mutual abuse; both the man and the woman stealing from each other for personal selfish abusive gain. Mutual abuse is perfectly fair as each side is treating the other side in the same way. Mutual abuse however is not moral or healthy or good. Mutual generosity and self-sacrifice for the benefit of the other is also fair as again each side is treating the other side in the same way. Mutual generosity is moral and healthy and good. Fairness is not the key issue in the equation in relations between men and women. The key issue is male investment and is the male investment taking place sustainable; not fairness.

    Lastly you talk about democracy and how cultural change has to come first before legal change. I totally agree with you on this. When TWRAs advocate for legal changes the point is to convince people that the legal changes we are advocating for are a good idea. Advocating for changes in the law is intended for the purpose of changing people’s beliefs thereby changing the culture thereby making people ready for the legal change that is desired and then finally building the support base to change the law so that the law will actually be changed. The purpose of political activism is to change people’s beliefs regarding the issue you are advocating for. You don’t start out accepting whatever beliefs are already prevalent; the point is to change things, not acquiescence to the status quo.

    • mamaziller says:

      Thank you for the reply. You know I agree with every word you said and basically cannot argue with it. “no ultimate way is the one way”—it is true that as time changes culture changes but human nature does not change as quickly and some things just do stay the same. Males and females working together for the benefit of children and society is one of those things. It just is better, it just does lead to more fulfillment, it just does lead to better societies and happier individuals. To me it certainly seems better.

      Respecting feminism so that they will respect traditionalism- well it seems that there are a lot of feminists thinking people. I figure there must be a reason why people do it, it must be that on some level they like it and get joy from it. I have only lived my life and not theirs so it is like I have tunnel vision. I do not know what they have experienced or what has led them to think the way they do. If I assume that they are just like me and only want what is best for themselves and others then I have to give value to the experiences that they have had that I have not and that I am not aware of.
      It is true that feminism is based on lies as far as I can see though, but they think traditionalism is based on lies.. so how are we to know who is right? In this sense the mind is not capable of knowing the truth.

      Feminists say they want choice for women, they say they want fathers to be involved, they say they want what is best for women, they say they want choice. But they lie, they want independence for women and that is not the same as choice. They want that the only choice women have is the choice to be an independent woman. Women today are lacking the choice to be dependent yet feminism is still pushing for women’s rights in the work place.

      Choice for women and men can be good if the choices we make are respected. The majority of women that I have spoken to in today’s reality would make the choice to be a homemaker if given that choice. I grew up without the notion that that choice exists and a lot of other women did as well. Feminists will argue that not everyone can be rich enough to have that choice but that is not true. I always use Bangladesh as an example because we lived there for 1 year. The people were poor but the women were homemakers and it worked.

      Also women can and have historically contributed economically (though much less than men and not always in a direct sense) while being a homemaker so money is not really the issue. Anyway in reality I agree with everything you said, with every word… but I cannot place my views above other people’s views because I have not experienced what they have.

  5. Judithann Campbell says:

    Hello again, Mamaziller 🙂 I very much appreciate the fact that you want to be respectful towards everyone, but I fear that you are trying to be nice to people who have no intention of ever being nice to you. I don’t think that telling the truth about feminists-or listening while they tell the truth about themselves, constitutes bashing them. I repeat: you are trying to be nice to people who have no intention of ever being nice to you. 😦

  6. Pingback: Gynocentrism, Fairness, and Morality | Secular Patriarchy

  7. mhornbeam says:

    I don’t know, Mamaziller, I identify as a feminist but I agree with a lot of what you say. I am always sad that the extremists are the ones we always hear from. Who wants to identify as a Christian when the most prominent Christians are Westboro Baptist? It’s always the few bad apples that spoil it for the rest of us.

    My two cents – if you as a woman want to stay home and care for your children and create a warm loving home for your partner – I think that’s wonderful. If you want to go out and work and give your family a possibly more secure future (certainly not guaranteed) and fulfill yourself in that way, more power to you. You get to decide.

  8. Pingback: Whose Fault is Feminism? | Secular Patriarchy

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s