Gynocentric Antinomianism: Feminism, Polyamory, and the Heretical Legacy of the Fallen Gnosis

In the unfolding of Western metaphysics and religious evolution, the concepts of antinomianism and Gnosticism occupy a central yet often neglected role. These two currents—heretical in their own right—share an inner thread: the rebellion against moral and cosmic order. This essay proposes that certain modern ideological formations, especially  feminism (in all of of its form) and polyamory, can be interpreted as derivatives of what may be termed gynocentric antinomianism—a fallen metaphysical order rooted in the legacy of Cathar and Manichaean Gnosis.

Antinomianism, by definition, is the rejection of moral or religious law in favor of spiritual or personal authority. It is the opposite of legalism, which upholds law as the pathway to salvation. In traditional theology, antinomianism is seen as a distortion, a corruption that places the self above divine or communal standards. But this corruption is not merely ethical; it is ontological. It stems from a worldview in which transcendence is not aligned with order, but with rupture, rebellion, and inversion.

Gnosticism, especially in its dualistic expressions like Manichaeanism and Catharism, provides the cosmological framework for this rebellion. Here, the material world—often coded as masculine, structured, and oppressive—is considered evil, a prison created by a false god or demiurge. True liberation lies in the immaterial, the feminine light within, the secret knowledge (gnosis) that allows the soul to transcend the physical world.

It is within this metaphysical logic that modern feminism and polyamory find their ancestral roots. Contemporary radical feminism, particularly in its postmodern or third-wave incarnations, explicitly challenges traditional moral norms, sexual codes, and family structures. It views these as patriarchal constructs—analogous to the Gnostic archons—designed to imprison female identity and agency. Similarly, polyamory functions not merely as a lifestyle choice but as a symbolic rebellion against the traditional pair bond, monogamy, and the family. These institutions are no longer seen as sacred or natural, but as artificial enclosures around feminine desire.

The connection to antinomianism is evident. Both feminism and polyamory reject the inherited moral order—not by accident or consequence, but by design. Their logic is internally based on a lie. The  false pretense of wanting to liberate one self (or the feminine) from structures of control which means to reject those structures as inherently illegitimate. This is not unlike the Gnostic rejection of Yahweh as a false god or the Cathar repudiation of the sacraments. In each case, law and order are understood as deceptions of a lower realm.

But modern gynocentric antinomianism introduces a critical novelty: it is no longer content to simply reject the masculine-coded law. It seeks to replace it with a new metaphysical norm—gynonormativity. In this worldview, the feminine becomes not only the subject of liberation but the source of moral meaning. The feminine desire, experience, and perspective become the new a priori of value. This is not equality but inversion; not a correction of injustice, but a reinstallation of power under a different hypostasis.

This metaphysical shift is made possible through what has been termed gynocentric immanence. The feminine saturates the world as presence, affect, and norm. In its fallen form, however, this saturation leads to gynocentric solipsism—the idea that reality itself is constituted by and for the feminine. The result is an ontological and epistemological realignment in which traditional notions of truth, virtue, and even reason are subordinated to the affective and intuitive register of the feminine.

Polyamory and feminism, then, are not simply social phenomena. They are the ritual and symbolic expressions of a deeper heretical lineage. Like the Cathar rejection of marriage and procreation, polyamory dismisses the sacredness of the conjugal bond in favor of a fluid matrix of desire. Like the Gnostic veneration of Sophia and the feminine light, feminism places woman at the center—not only of history or society, but of metaphysical value.

Thus, gynocentric antinomianism is not merely a sociological curiosity. It is a metaphysical revolution masquerading as social progress. And it represents not the end of an alleged patriarchy, but the beginning of a new theogony in which the feminine, severed from its spiritual moorings, becomes both goddess and tyrant.

In the end, the question is not whether women are oppressed or liberated, but whether our metaphysics can sustain a world without logos—without law, order, and transcendence. Gynocentric antinomianism suggests that it cannot. It replaces one form of domination with another, one heresy with a new orthodoxy, and one fallen world with another. But it does so under the banner of freedom, and in that lies its greatest deception.

"Where structure collapses, thought rebuilds.

Peering through the veils of power and illusion.

Telegon Project: A new cartography of consciousness"