Gynocentrism and the Misandric Premise of Feminism

Gynocentrism is a structural and ideological orientation where societal systems—both cultural and institutional—are configured around female interests. In this schema, women are elevated to a quasi-aristocratic status, implicitly deserving of protection, deference, and provision. Males, conversely, are designated as a service class, tasked with fulfilling the needs and preferences of women. Feminism, under critical scrutiny, does not represent a movement for genuine female liberation. Rather, it has functioned historically and continues to function as a vehicle of misandry: its primary objective is the acquisition of male-associated privileges and assets without accepting the liabilities traditionally bound to those privileges. This formulation disregards the observable reality that men, on average, do not possess an excess of power or resources, but rather bear the disproportionate share of risk, burden, and responsibility.

A recurring foundational claim in nearly all feminist frameworks is that women—across historical and even prehistoric contexts—have been subjected to systemic oppression by men. This oppression is typically attributed to the organizing principle of patriarchy, which is said to have restricted women from achieving goals, entering specific professions, or pursuing personal ambitions. Male interference, both individual and institutional, is cited as the primary cause for this historical lack of female autonomy.

However, this premise invites scrutiny: historically and in modern times, women have been the full beneficiaries of society’s protections and provisions. From the norm of “women and children first,” to preferential access to medicine, welfare, consumer goods, male courtship, society is structured to serve female interests by default. This structural prioritization continues even as men are expected to bear the costs.

Schrödinger’s Feminism

The phenomenon known as “Schrödinger’s feminism” refers to the cognitive flexibility by which a woman may self-identify as either empowered or oppressed depending on which state offers a higher payoff in a given context. This ideological switch-hitting enables selective advantage-taking across a wide range of social and institutional settings, allowing adherence to mutually exclusive claims—such as the assertion of complete autonomy paired with demands for special protections—depending solely on convenience.

The Double Standard in Mate Selection

Contemporary women often critique societal beauty standards as oppressive and unrealistic. However, in the context of mate selection, they frequently uphold hyper-selective criteria: height, wealth, and physical attractiveness (the “6'6”, six-figure, six-pack” archetype) are recurrent prerequisites. These standards are statistically unattainable for the overwhelming majority of men, and yet they persist without corresponding public critique. The dissonance illustrates an asymmetric demand structure wherein male performance is continuously assessed against extraordinary benchmarks, while female expectations remain shielded from equivalent scrutiny.

Female hypergamy

Female hypergamy—the drive to secure a mate of higher status or capability than the woman herself—is not a finite process. In a world where every man meets elite standards, new thresholds would emerge. There is no equilibrium in female selectivity; the mechanism is recursive. Hypergamy is not a bug but a feature, optimized for continual dissatisfaction and upward reevaluation of mate eligibility—an absolutely biologically unfair system towards men that women are not afraid to take advantage of.

Agency and Contribution

Empirical and anecdotal evidence from male-dominated technical domains, particularly in software engineering, demonstrates that male professionals can be adapted into feminized roles more readily (consider this codeforces grandmaster) than women can be upskilled into high-functioning technical roles. This suggests a structural asymmetry in agency and social utility. While not an absolute claim, the trend reflects measurable discrepancies in output, innovation, and self-sufficiency.

The "Women-Are-Wonderful" Effect

Psychological research identifies a consistent bias known as the “women-are-wonderful” effect, in which both sexes—especially women—assign more positive qualities to women than to men. This includes perceptions of kindness, empathy, and virtue. However, across numerous intellectual and creative domains—including but not limited to mathematics, science, philosophy, and literature—men have historically and presently demonstrated higher output, deeper innovation, and broader influence. The attribution of superior traits to women is thus incongruent with empirical measures of contribution and achievement.

Consider the case of "Cleo" on MathOverflow, an anonymous user who received significant praise and admiration for their high-quality mathematical contributions. Under the presumption they were a woman, the community response included elevated celebration, exceptionalism, and emphasis on novelty. However, once it was revealed that Cleo was actually a man, the narrative  became dismissive—“every man can do this, nothing special.” This illustrates a clear asymmetry in attribution and valuation: identical accomplishments are elevated when believed to originate from a woman and trivialized when attributed to a man. Such differential treatment exemplifies the “women-are-wonderful” effect and reinforces the broader societal tendency to overvalue female participation and undervalue male excellence.

The Male Silence

Men perform all necessary adult tasks—work, maintenance, financial planning, health upkeep—without rhetorical fanfare. The designation “strong, independent man” is nonexistent, not due to a lack of qualification, but because competence is the male baseline. The performance of adult responsibility is not celebrated; it is expected. This contrasts sharply with the social premium attached to female independence, which is routinely framed as exceptional and worthy of affirmation.

Sexual Selection as Spectatorship

Women generally do not compete in the existential arena alongside men; they position themselves at the terminal point of competition, selecting from among the victors. This renders the male struggle a prerequisite for female approval, not a shared journey. The outcome is transactional: women seek to access the benefits of male achievement without participating in its production. This objectifies men as instruments of utility and success.

Transactional View of Masculinity

Women, in the aggregate, do not conceptualize masculinity as a trait with intrinsic worth. Rather, it is appraised exclusively through the lens of utility: what can a man provide in terms of excitement, resources, or emotional labor? When this utility ceases, the man becomes socially invisible. There is no stable recognition of male personhood independent of performance and provision.

Permanent Testing (aka shit testing) and Resentment Mechanism

Even when a man satisfies all desired conditions—material, emotional, sexual—he is subject to ongoing testing. This continuous evaluation is not merely for assurance but acts as a subconscious challenge to his position. Paradoxically, success in this process breeds resentment. The male's capability becomes a source of envy and hostility, reinforcing the instability of the relationship dynamic.

Conclusion

In light of the given analysis, the male condition in contemporary society is defined by disposability, perpetual qualification, and a lack of intrinsic recognition. In contrast, women benefit from structural prioritization, inconsistent ideological demands, and immunity from equivalent standards. Feminism is not a call for egalitarianism but is nothing except a cheap, dirty, covert tactic for a power grab in context of social ape hierarchy competition.

My message to women

If you genuinely care about the state of society and the direction in which it is heading, you must engage in honest self-reflection and initiate change from within. The current dynamic—built on asymmetrical expectations, unreciprocated obligations, and conditional respect—is reaching a breaking point. Men are growing weary of a system that demands everything from them while offering little in return.

My message to men

Your value is not defined by how much you can give, fix, provide, or endure for others. You are not a disposable utility. Preserve your time, your energy, and your resources. Protect your mental and emotional well-being. You do not owe anyone access to your labor, your finances, or your vulnerability simply because you were born male.

Be cautious in a world where you are often judged solely by your usefulness. Choose to walk away from dynamics that reduce you to a transaction. Choose to honor your own life first.