Gynocentrism Read online

  Gynocentrism

  From Feudalism to the Modern Disney Princess

  Peter Wright

  Preface

  Gynocentrism, a centuries old term, refers to the principle of female centeredness or female dominance in various social or interpersonal contexts.

  The term has recently enjoyed a resurgence, serving again as a descriptor of the expanding yet centuries old obsession with the rights, status, and power of women. This book traces the history of that tradition to its roots in medieval society, while being careful to note the difference between benign gynocentric acts and the more problematic examples of gynocentric culture.

  The essays collected in this volume were originally penned as separate pieces for the website Gynocentrism and its Cultural Origins, and have since been revised for this eBook edition. There are several repetitions of comments and quotes for which I apologize and ask the reader’s grace – they are integral to the structure of the articles and for that purpose have been retained.

  The essays are grouped into nine parts exploring various aspects of gynocentrism, and providing examples of the phenomenon from historical literature. The final part, Post Gynocentric Relationships explores the possibility of relationships built on the notion of friendship as an alternative to neurotic shibboleths of romantic love.

  Peter Wright, August 2014.

  Table of Contents

  PREFACE

  PART ONE: About Gynocentrism

  1. Introduction to Gynocentrism

  2. Gynocentric Culture

  3. Timeline of Gynocentric Culture

  4. La Querelle des Femmes

  5. Romance Writing as Medium

  PART TWO: The Structure of Gynocentrism

  6. Gynocentric Chivalry

  7. Origins of Romantic Love

  8. The Sexual-Relations Contract

  9. Damseling, Chivalry and Courtly Love

  10. Taming Men for Women and State

  11. Chasing The Dragon: Superstimuli

  12. Gynocentrism as a Narcissistic Pathology

  PART THREE: Lester Ward’s Gynocentrism Theory

  13. Women: Our Better Halves (1898)

  14. The Gynæcocentric Theory (1903)

  PART FOUR: Historical Accounts of Gynocentrism

  15. The Henpecked Club

  16. Female Power, Influence and Privilege (1835)

  17. A Privileged and Pampered Sex (1896)

  PART FIVE: Women’s Perspectives

  18. Jane Anger (1589)

  19. Modesta Pozzo (1590)

  20. Lucrezia Marinella (1600)

  21. Margaret Cavendish (1662)

  PART SIX: Gynocentric Etiquette

  22. Etiquette for Gentlemen (1847)

  23. Manual of Politeness (1873)

  24. Manners for Men (1897)

  25. Etiquette for Men (1929)

  PART SEVEN: Rituals of Romance

  26. The Art of Attraction

  27. Valentine’s Day

  28. The Rituals of Marriage

  29. Down the Aisle Again

  PART EIGHT: The Status Quo

  30. What Happened to Chivalry?

  31. Feminism - The Same Old Story

  32. Gynocentrism: Why So Hard To Kill?

  PART NINE: Post Gynocentric Relationships

  33. Sex and Attachment

  34. Romantic Love, or Friendship?

  35. Pleasure-seeking vs. Relationships

  36. Don’t Just Do Something, SIT THERE

  PART ONE

  About Gynocentrism

  Introduction to Gynocentrism

  Gynocentrism n. (Greek, γυνή, “female” – Latin centrum, “centred” ) refers to a dominant or exclusive focus on women in theory or practice; or to the advocacy of this.1 Anything can be considered gynocentric (Adj.) when it is concerned exclusively with a female (or specifically a feminist) point of view.2

  Introduction

  Modern gynocentrism is facilitated by three interrelated pressures, the first biological and the subsequent two being cultural developments:

  Gynocentrism 1:0 refers to basic instinctual behavior inherited from our hominid ancestors for prioritizing female reproductive capacity; that is, we tend to protect and provide for women and children as a way to encourage survival of our species, a tendency reinforced by varying local customs throughout history until the Middle Ages, when a confluence of cultural factors came together to create gynocentrism 2:0 →

  Gynocentrism 2:0 – refers to a cultural intensification of the gynocentric tendency, arising in Medieval Europe during a period cross-cultural influences and momentous changes in gendered customs. Beginning in around the 12th century European society birthed an intersection of Arabic practices of female worship, aristocratic courting trends, the Marian cult, along with the imperial patronage of Eleanor of Aquitaine and her daughter Marie De Champagne who together elaborated the military notion of chivalry into a notion of servicing ladies, a practice otherwise known as ‘courtly love.’

  Courtly love was enacted by minstrels, playrights and troubadours, and especially via hired romance-writers like Chrétien de Troyes and Andreas Capellanus who laid down a model of romantic fiction that is still the biggest grossing genre of literature today. That confluence of factors generated the cultural conventions that continue to drive gynocentrism today, which was consolidated by one significant further development →

  Gynocentrism 3:0, which refers to the developed economy with service industry where women can enter labour force and gain financial independence from men, which (1) creates demand for more rights vis-a-vis men because there is no longer a trade-off as in traditional relationships, and (2) renders women free to pursue increasing degrees of relational status as desired. These factors, in combination with the contraceptive pill, have given gynocentrism increased motility.3

  Gynocentrism as a cultural phenomenon

  The primary elements of gynocentric culture, as we experience it today, are derived from practices originating in medieval society such as feudalism, chivalry and courtly love that continue to inform contemporary society in subtle ways. Such gynocentric patters constitute a “sexual feudalism,” as attested by female writers like Lucrezia Marinella who in 1600 AD recounted that women of lower socioeconomic classes were treated as superiors by men who acted as servants or beasts born to serve them, or by Modesta Pozzo who in 1590 wrote;

  “don’t we see that men’s rightful task is to go out to work and wear themselves out trying to accumulate wealth, as though they were our factors or stewards, so that we can remain at home like the lady of the house directing their work and enjoying the profit of their labors? That, if you like, is the reason why men are naturally stronger and more robust than us — they need to be, so they can put up with the hard labor they must endure in our service.”4

  The golden casket above depicting scenes of servile behaviour toward women were typical of courtly love culture of the Middle Ages. Such objects were given to women as gifts by men seeking to impress. Note the woman standing with hands on hips in a position of authority, and the man being led around by a neck halter, his hands clasped in a position of subservience.

  It’s clear that much of what we today call gynocentrism was invented in the Middle Ages with the cultural practices of romantic chivalry and courtly love. In 12th century Europe, feudalism served as the basis for a new model for love in which men were to play the role of vassal to women who played the role of an idealized Lord. C.S. Lewis, back in the middle of the 20th Century, referred to this historical revolution as “the feudalisation of love,” and stated that it has left no corner of our ethics, our imagination, or our daily life untouched. “Compared with this revolution,” states Lewis, “the Renaissance is a mere ripple on the surface of literature.
”5 Lewis further states;

  “Everyone has heard of courtly love, and everyone knows it appeared quite suddenly at the end of the eleventh century at Languedoc. The sentiment, of course, is love, but love of a highly specialized sort, whose characteristics may be enumerated as Humility, Courtesy, and the Religion of Love. The lover is always abject. Obedience to his lady’s lightest wish, however whimsical, and silent acquiescence in her rebukes, however unjust, are the only virtues he dares to claim. Here is a service of love closely modelled on the service which a feudal vassal owes to his lord. The lover is the lady’s ‘man’. He addresses her as midons, which etymologically represents not ‘my lady’ but ‘my lord’. The whole attitude has been rightly described as ‘a feudalisation of love’. This solemn amatory ritual is felt to be part and parcel of the courtly life.” 6

  With the advent of (initially courtly) women being elevated to the position of ‘Lord’ in intimate relationships, and with this general sentiment diffusing to the masses and across much of the world today, we are justified in talking of a gynocentric cultural complex that affects, among other things, relationships between men and women. Further, unless evidence of widespread gynocentric culture can be found prior to the Middle Ages, then gynocentrism is precisely 800 years old. In order to determine if this thesis is valid we need to look further at what we mean by “gynocentrism”.

  The term gynocentrism has been in circulation since the 1800’s, with the general definition being “focused on women; concerned with only women.” 7 From this definition we see that gynocentrism could refer to any female-centered practice, or to a single gynocentric act carried out by one individual. There is nothing inherently wrong with a gynocentric act (eg. celebrating Mother’s Day) , or for that matter an androcentric act (celebrating Father’s Day). However when a given act becomes instituted in the culture to the exclusion of other acts we are then dealing with a hegemonic custom — i.e. such is the relationship custom of elevating women to the position of men’s social, moral or spiritual superiors.

  Author of Gynocentrism Theory Adam Kostakis has attempted to expand the definition of gynocentrism to refer to “male sacrifice for the benefit of women” and “the deference of men to women,” and he concludes; “Gynocentrism, whether it went by the name honor, nobility, chivalry, or feminism, its essence has gone unchanged. It remains a peculiarly male duty to help the women onto the lifeboats, while the men themselves face a certain and icy death.” 8

  While we can agree with Kostakis’ descriptions of assumed male duty, the phrase gynocentric culture more accurately carries his intention than gynocentrism alone. Thus when used alone in the context of this book gynocentrism refers to part or all of gynocentric culture, which is defined here as any culture instituting rules for gender relationships that benefit females at the expense of males across a broad range of measures.

  At the base of gynocentric culture lies the practice of enforced male sacrifice for the benefit of women. If we accept this definition we must look back and ask whether male sacrifices throughout history were always made for the sake women, or alternatively for the sake of some other primary goal? For instance, when men went to die in vast numbers in wars, was it for women, or was it rather for Man, King, God and Country? If the latter we cannot then claim that this was a result of some intentional gynocentric culture, at least not in the way I have defined it here. If the sacrifice isn’t intended directly for the benefit women, even if women were occasional beneficiaries of male sacrifice, then we are not dealing with gynocentric culture.

  Male utility and disposability strictly “for the benefit of women” comes in strongly only after the advent of the 12th century gender revolution in Europe – a revolution that delivered us terms like gallantry, chivalry, chivalric love, courtesy, damsels, romance and so on. From that period onward gynocentric practices grew exponentially, culminating in the demands of today’s feminist movement. In sum, gynocentrism (ie. gynocentric culture) was a patchy phenomenon at best before the middle ages, after which it became ubiquitous.

  With this in mind it makes little sense to talk of gynocentric culture starting with the industrial revolution a mere 200 years ago (or 100 or even 30 yrs ago), or of it being two million years old as some would argue. We are not only fighting two million years of genetic programming; our culturally constructed problem of gender inequity is much simpler to pinpoint and to potentially reverse. All we need do is look at the circumstances under which gynocentric culture first began to flourish and attempt to reverse those circumstances. Specifically, that means rejecting the illusions of romantic love (feudalised love), along with the practices of misandry, male shaming and servitude that ultimately support it.

  La Querelle des Femmes, and advocacy for women

  The Querelle des Femmes translates as the “quarrel about women” and amounts to what we might today call a gender-war. The querelle had its beginning in twelfth century Europe and finds its culmination in the feminist-driven ideology of today (though some authors claim, unconvincingly, that the querelle came to an end in the 1700s). The basic theme of the centuries-long quarrel revolved, and continues to revolve, around advocacy for the rights, power and status of women, and thus Querelle des Femmes serves as the originating title for gynocentric discourse.

  If we consider the longevity of this revolution we might be inclined to agree with Barbarossaaa’s claim “that feminism is a perpetual advocacy machine for women”.

  To place the above events into a coherent timeline, chivalric servitude toward women was elaborated and given patronage first under the reign of Eleanor of Aquitaine (1137-1152) and instituted culturally throughout Europe over the subsequent 200 year period. After becoming thus entrenched on European soil there arose the Querelle des Femmes which refers to the advocacy culture that arose for protecting, perpetuating and increasing female power in relation to men that continues, in an unbroken tradition, in the efforts of contemporary feminism.9

  Writings from the Middle Ages forward are full of testaments about men attempting to adapt to the feudalisation of love and the serving of women, along with the emotional agony, shame and sometimes physical violence they suffered in the process. Gynocentric chivalry and the associated querelle have not received much elaboration in men’s studies courses to-date, but with the emergence of new manuscripts and quality English translations it may be profitable to begin blazing this trail.10

  References

  1. Oxford English Dictionary – Vers.4.0 (2009), Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0199563838

  2. Oxford English Dictionary 2010

  3. Three points elaborated during online conversation with Snir, October 2016

  4. Modesta Pozzo, The Worth of Women: their Nobility and Superiority to Men

  5. C.S. Lewis, Friendship, chapter in The Four Loves, HarperCollins, 1960

  6. C.S. Lewis, The Allegory of Love, Oxford University Press, 1936

  7. Dictionary.com – Gynocentric

  8. Adam Kostakis, Gynocentrism Theory – (Published online, 2011). Although Kostakis assumes gynocentrism has been around throughout recorded history, he singles out the Middle Ages for comment: “There is an enormous amount of continuity between the chivalric class code which arose in the Middle Ages and modern feminism… One could say that they are the same entity, which now exists in a more mature form – certainly, we are not dealing with two separate creatures.”

  9. Joan Kelly, Early Feminist Theory and the Querelle des Femmes (1982), reprinted in Women, History and Theory, UCP (1984)

  10. The New Male Studies Journal has published thoughtful articles touching on the history and influence of chivalry in the lives of males.

  2. Gynocentric culture

  Did female-centered culture begin in the prehistoric era?

  This question is sometimes asked by people who feel that gynocentrism has been around for the entirety of human evolution. The answer to that question is of course yes – gynocentrism has been around throughout human history. However
it’s important to make a distinction between gynocentrism (that is, individual gynocentric acts, customs, or events) and gynocentric culture (a pervasive cultural complex that affects every aspect of life). We will never be precise enough to make sense of this subject unless we insist on this distinction between gynocentric acts and gynocentric-culture.

  Gynocentrism:

  It’s easy to overstate the import of specific examples of gynocentrism when in fact such examples may be equally balanced, culturally speaking, by male-centered acts, customs, or events which negate the concept of a pervasive gynocentric culture. Here we are reminded of the old adage that one swallow does not make a summer, and that likewise individual gynocentric acts, or even a small collection of such acts, do not amount to a pervasive gynocentric culture.

  Individual examples of gynocentrism are sometimes misconstrued as representing a broader culture, as seen in the discussion around ancient female figurines which some claim are indications of goddess-worshipping, gynocentric cultures. Not only is the import of the female figurines vastly overstated, the quantity discovered is potentially exaggerated according to leading feminist archaeologists: