THE LAST TABOO
THE UNKNOWN HISTORY Of MISANDRY, GYNOCENTRISM, FEMINISM AND THE FUTURE MATRIARCHY
The Last Taboo is a trilogy that constitutes a comprehensive and systemic encyclopedia focusing on misandry, feminism, and gynocentrism.
What is misandry?
Misandry has been defined and is the hatred of males or strong prejudice against men as a sex. Alongside hatred, it also describes the oppression of males as the inferior sex by both men and women. The word comes from misos (Greek μῖσος, "hatred") + and- (Greek ἄνδρ-, a stem of ἄνηρ, "man") + -y (Greek -ία, abstract noun suffix). Etymologically the origins in the English language are traced to 1871 with usage in European languages, French ("Misandrie") and German (Männerhaß), from at least 1803. Dutch sources show "Misandrie" being translated to "Mannenhaat" ("Mannen = Man"+"Haat = Hate") in 1843. Below is a further and more detailed discussion on the etymological origins of misandry. Feminist activists and writers have reported that they see Misandry, including ironic-misandry, as a tool or weapon to be employed politically across media. The above definition may be improved by distinguishing the different levels of misandry.
What is gynocentrism?
Gynocentrism (Greek, γυνή, “female” – Latin centrum, “centered” ) 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) focus or point of view whether in interpersonal or cultural;-societal-political context. The definition we use in this book for Gynocentrism is not the traditional one but goes beyond the specific borders of time and geographical boundaries as the traditional definition does.
Yet, it is a multi-faceted definition that still includes the traditional too. Thus on its deepest levels, Gynocentrism is rooted in the biological differences between men and women leading to an unavoidable male dependence on women among others as babies and young children and thus the focus on women in society, interpersonal relationships and gender roles. On this level especially regarding birth, pregnancy, and creation of life it includes the anti-male bias that denies the male part in life creation and concentrating only on the birth sequence itself. It's the misandric degradation of men from an actual human being to a nonentity as birth in a female is possible without males.
Coupled with reproductive rights the end goal is the creation of the disposable father myth that is un-necessary for the child. That's the basic level to most feminist laws regarding child custody, alimony and many more. It's also the manipulation of biological truth that both men and women create life while women give birth and men provide, protect, save and make it less painful (endurable) for everyone. As standing opposed to feminist lies and propaganda, Gynocentrism is not about female fertility but life – especially the disposable one (of men). That's the first pillar. Based on the first one, the second pillar of Gynocentrism is putting women on a pedestal, the so-called self princess syndrome, and being there at a whim for all her caprices and demands. The third pillar of Gynocentrism is the idea of female superiority over men – especially the moral one
From those two basic pillars springs:
The demand from men to provide for the woman giving her all earning and almost leaving nothing for the man
The reality of taking all of the abuse, physical one of course, but never hitting back
►• Gynomendacity: this is a term describing the technique used by authoritarian feminists to prevent others from learning the facts of history as we attempt to do in this book. This is crucial not only to manipulate history, truth, and reality but especially for the achievement of the feminist end goal and utopia that is a feminist-gynocentric matriarchy. This method is derived from cultural Marxism. “Critical theory” was developed by the “Frankfurt School” to undermine what they saw as a great evil – Western civilization – so they could replace it with a bureaucratic utopia based on their theories. Powerful capitalist foundations, controlled by the wealthiest families in the world, have financed the cultural Marxism project for the reason that social control through oppressive bureaucracy serves their interests. The goal is to re-institutionalize serfdom. Female supremacists are financially rewarded for imposing the brainwashing falsehoods of gynomendacity. If you want to become a well-rounded MRA (Men’s Rights Activist), then you must learn about the unknown history of misandry, gynocentrism as well as feminism which this is all the book is about.
Feminism is gynocentrism!
The feminist project is a continuation of the longer gynocentric tradition to which it belongs. Feminism took gynocentrism into a new level of extremity by grounding it in misandry and with the aim at creating a gynocentric-feminist matriarchy as we will elaborate in this book and with the help of the modern welfare state whether it's the Marxist-left or the liberal-right one. The underlying thesis in this book regarding feminism and gynocentrism is adopted from Adam Kostakis, put and summarized in this following passage:
"Feminism is only the modern packaging of Gynocentrism, an ancient product, made possible in its present form by the extensive public welfare arrangements of the post-war period. In spite of its radical rhetoric, the content of feminism, or one could say, its essence, is remarkably traditional; so traditional that its core ideas are simply taken for granted, as unquestioned and unquestionable dogma, enjoying uniform assent across the political spectrum. Feminism is distinguishable only because it takes a certain traditional idea – the deference of men to women – to an unsustainable extreme. Political extremism, a product of modernity, shall fittingly put an end to the traditional idea itself; that is, in the aftermath of its astounding, all-singing, all-dancing final act"
The traditional idea under discussion is a male sacrifice for the benefit of women, which we term Gynocentrism. This is the historical norm, and it was the way of the world long before anything called ‘feminism’ made itself known. There is an enormous amount of continuity between the chivalric class code which arose in the Middle Ages and modern feminism, for instance. That the two are distinguishable is clear enough, but the latter is simply a progressive extension of the former over several centuries, having retained its essence over a long period of transition. 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.