Refuting the Feminist Myth of Patriarchy through the Lens of Gynocentric Ontology and Evolutionary Anthropology

The feminist narrative of patriarchy rests on the foundational premise that men, from the dawn of civilization, structured reality, knowledge, and power around themselves, thereby marginalizing and oppressing women. However, when we examine this claim through the lens of gynocentric immanence, evolutionary anthropology, and ontological structures, we find an entirely different picture—one that not only displaces the feminist myth but reorients our understanding of history, power, and society.

1. Evolutionary Foundations of Gynocentrism

Anthropological and primatological evidence demonstrates that primate social structures, including those of our hominid ancestors, were inherently gynocentric. Female-centered dynamics organized group interactions, nurturance, and social knowledge. The discovery of Australopithecus afarensis (“Lucy”) and the crucial role of midwifery in early human evolution illustrate this point.

Ian Tattersall (1999) noted that upright posture in early hominids created a need for birth assistance due to the increased difficulty of childbirth. This unique evolutionary pressure birthed midwifery as a female institution, leading to the earliest forms of organized knowledge and spiritual authority.

Midwives—acting as healers, spiritual guides, and caretakers—possessed both biological and cultural knowledge. This knowledge was transmitted matrilineally and formed the foundation of early religious and symbolic life. Thus, the earliest epistemological and moral frameworks were female-structured.

2. Gynocentric Immanence as Ontological Ground

The concept of gynocentric immanence asserts that the world is perceived as saturated with the feminine principle. This is not merely cultural, but metaphysical: the female archetype is embedded in how reality is experienced, understood, and reproduced.

In this framework, the feminine is not a gendered role but a hypostatic presence—the grounding of being in birth, nurture, and the life cycle. Hence, the earliest spiritualities and ontologies, such as goddess worship, matrilineal mythologies, and feminine sacrality, reflect an already established norm: reality is experienced as feminine.

Therefore, feminist claims that patriarchy has structured reality since its inception fail to recognize that reality itself was experienced and structured first and foremost around the feminine.

3. Feminist Inversion of the Historical Timeline

Feminist theory often mistakes the rise of institutional male dominance—armies, priesthoods, and centralized power—as the origin of patriarchy. Yet this phase is a reactive inversion of a previously dominant female-centered order. In many ancient cultures, men did not create reality—they responded to a reality already hypostasized as feminine.

This inversion does not erase the deeper metaphysical and cultural gynocentrism but overlays it with new political functions. Feminism mistakenly identifies these functions as “patriarchy,” while ignoring the residual and ongoing feminine normativity within them.

4. Epistemological and Normative Gynocentrism (Gynonormativity)

While feminism claims that women were excluded from knowledge production and cultural value, this overlooks the concept of gynonormativity: the unconscious internalization of feminine moral, aesthetic, and social norms as the standard of goodness, care, and truth.

Even in supposedly patriarchal societies, women were:

The moral gatekeepers of the home and community

The preservers and transmitters of cultural traditions

The beneficiaries of male chivalry, sacrifice, and protection

Thus, the alleged exclusion of women from public power does not imply oppression but reflects a division of spheres rooted in deeper metaphysical gynocentrism. Feminism conflates political visibility with existential primacy—a critical category error.

5. Feminism as a Gnostic Mutation of Gynocentrism

Feminism is not a rebellion against patriarchy but a fallen, ideological mutation of primal gynocentrism. Like the Cathars and other Gnostic sects that distorted female spiritual power into dualistic rebellion, feminism distorts the feminine archetype into a narrative of victimhood and antagonism.

It thus replaces the original sacrality of the feminine hypostasis with a politicized abstraction that negates the ontological grounding of womanhood. In this way, feminism becomes a form of nihilism: not an affirmation of the feminine, but a denial of its deeper metaphysical role.

Conclusion

The feminist myth of patriarchy is built on an ontological inversion, an epistemological misreading, and a historical erasure. It denies the primordial reality of gynocentric immanence and overlooks the evolutionary, spiritual, and symbolic centrality of the feminine.

Rather than being the victims of history, women were—and continue to be—the ontological and moral centers of culture. The task, then, is not to reclaim a stolen power, but to recognize the invisible hegemony of the feminine already embedded in the deepest layers of being.

This refutation is not a return to essentialism, but a re-grounding of historical truth in metaphysical realism—a realism that feminism, in its ideological blindness, has long forgotten.

"Where structure collapses, thought rebuilds.

Peering through the veils of power and illusion.

Telegon Project: A new cartography of consciousness"