The Patriarchal Gynocracy

Psychological operations to divide the sexes, destroy the family unit, promote promiscuity, and collapse western civilization—and how it could all be reversed in one generation.

A nation can survive its fools and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within.

— Marcus Tullius Cicero

A Natural Team

Discussions of relations between the sexes tend to trigger a reflexive reaction in both. Men and women associate any criticism related to their sex as a personal attack on them. In the 20th-century war on humanity, psychological operations targeting sex identity planted seeds of tribal allegiances that led to confrontation by stimulating in-group and out-group behavior. In the sad games of sexual blame, a critique of the astroturfed feminist movements might be mistaken by a woman as criticism of all women, while the terms INCEL or MGTOW or “toxic masculinity” might trigger defensive behavior and counter-offensive reactions in men.

The most effective means of controlling the masses has always been to keep them divided by whatever divisions can be identified and exploited so that constant distraction and chaos prevent them from accurately identifying the real culprits in power who create these conditions for their benefit. The most effective method of controlling population (apart from abortion and “vaccines”) is to keep the sexes perpetually at odds over trifling issues that can only gain traction when good times create weak men.

Men and women possess complementary physical and psychological strengths that, when combined, create a balanced and formidable partnership. Women generally score higher in emotional intelligence, enabling them to empathize, communicate effectively, and navigate social complexities. Men tend to excel more in logical reasoning and problem-solving under stress. They are also more willing to take risks, which can lead to innovative solutions through bold decisions. Women typically exhibit greater risk aversion, promoting caution and evaluation. Working together, they can balance brave initiatives and cautious planning, reducing potential downsides.

Men generally have superior spatial abilities, crucial for navigation and physical manipulation tasks. Women excel more in verbal skills, enhancing communication through linguistic processing.

Both sexes have different stress responses. Men adopt a "fight or flight" response, leading to decisive action in crises. Women are more likely to engage in "tend and befriend" behaviors, fostering social bonds and collaborative solutions. Men typically exhibit more task-oriented leadership, focusing on goals and efficiency. Women resort to relational leadership, emphasizing cohesion and morale.

These complimenting traits strengthen the other when working in harmony. Historically, this harmonious cohabitation was done for the successful conception and rearing of offspring and the strengthening of the wider community or culture. When the focus of cohabitation and cooperation went from the familial to the political, from the natural to the manufactured, and from domestic strength to individual desires, what promoted success throughout the ages was ignored in favor of the differences that foster division and have pitted the sexes against each other ever since.

---

Neurological differences between the sexes…

How they destroyed men…

---

Women’s Liberation

In the latter half of the 20th century, the feminist movement got its insider funding to begin the destabilization process from various government entities that controlled influential publishing industries in New York City and London. Under the guise of fighting the “cultural cold war” the feminist movement, particularly the second wave, sought to address issues such as gender inequality, reproductive rights, and workplace discrimination. The state, recognizing the social and political popularity of these issues, provided funding for various feminist initiatives, including research grants, educational programs, and public awareness propaganda campaigns. Generations of young women soon believed they were perpetual victims of a conspiratorial patriarchy violating rights that had already been won.

The divide and conquer agenda was just getting started. If the government could successfully convince women to view men as the source of their unhappiness and conversely their future happiness as a product of state-endowed rights being withheld by men, then “patriarchy” could become the engineered enemy du jour of the next wave of feminism. The state could leverage that social and political capital by promoting certain causes to enflame tensions and exploit the increasingly popular yet shallow prioritized female ambitions of self-actualization through hyperindividualism.