As of the posting of this article its officially 2017, good day Current Year +2. So to start off strong I’m pouncing on something that is fairly serious and rather appropriate considering last year. Did extreme Gynocentrism cause the fall of Rome?
I’m going to look into what historical records we have and try to figure out if the civilization then was as centered around the comforts or women as ours is today. Granted, a lot of the records from that era have been destroyed by various book burnings and the like during the Dark Ages done by the Christians and Muslims of that era. Also add in the game of telephone when it comes to translating through multiple languages over the years and I know some things will be lost. However, this is still something worthwhile to look into because I don’t think any of us want to enter a second Dark Age. At very least we can at least say we tried to stop it by making sure we aren’t unknowingly repeating history.
The sources I’ll be using for this article are varied but follow thus:
– http://www.ancient.eu/article/659/
– https://www.jstor.org/stable/3288382?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
– https://www.the-romans.co.uk/women.htm
– http://www.womenintheancientworld.com/women_in_ancient_rome.htm
– https://www.britannica.com/topic/Lucretia-ancient-Roman-heroine
– https://books.google.com/books?id=mEtoCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA155&lpg=PA155&dq=homosexuality+in+ancient+rome+feminization&source=bl&ots=UDb_dVSJK2&sig=pQIRcYr05wjaCPQIHB4COChiSZY&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwibwrjhvZnRAhWEOiYKHU38BJAQ6AEIPjAH#v=onepage&q=fem&f=false
I realize due to some of these organizations having a feminist contingent, that view will be in the sources somewhat. However, I shall do my best to filter that out where I can, but might keep it in at some points if it shows a contextual connection with our own era. It is my hope that a lot of the same signs of decay don’t show up here, but if they do we can have something to point to to show that the extremist gynocentrism that is feminism will cause the fall of Western Civilization as we know it if we don’t stop it now. With that goal in mind Lets Hammer This In!
To begin we do need to look at the beginnings, now Alison has mentioned multiple times about how the Sabine women led to the formation of the original nation of Rome. This is viewed in history as the ‘rape of the Sabine women’ by some historians. Some see this as the legitimate original definition of kidnapping, but I wouldn’t be surprised certain feminist and gynocentric people want to project contemporary definitions onto the event, or even events mentioned later in this article. As such, I think we can take this as our tell that said historians fail to see their own gynocentrism as a potential negative. With our understanding of the context of what happened we should now be calling it the negotiations of the Sabine women. While I’m sure some rape in our perspective did occur during the war between the early Romans and the Sabine men, it was the women’s negotiating tactic of withholding themselves that ultimately led to the formation of the initial Kingdom of Rome. This sets a precedent for the entire civilization of Rome up until its formation into a Republic and later the Greater Roman Empire. I state this because the shift from a Kingdom into a Republic was the rape (in the Roman sense) of Lucretia by King Tarquin. Then there was the insanity of Caligula near the end. So effectively if a feminists wanted to, they could make the argument that Rome was a ‘rape culture’ due to the shifts in the form of civilization being defined by the ‘rape’ of women. I, however, see these events as proof that Roman culture was at its core gynocentric, just as any other historical civilization is. The desire to protect the ‘virtuous bride’ was strong with them.
“But this isn’t how Rome shifted into an Empire! Julius Caesar did that all on his own!”I hear some say. This, however, is up in the air. I’m sure this possibility wouldn’t be put into history books if he was raped, due to the nature of his place in history. But there is video of Caesar’s rape in the Sparticus TV show. Granted, that is far from historically accurate on many levels, but there are also some mentions of him as the “Queen of Bithynia” in texts for such a reason, though with the aforementioned understanding I’m guessing it was more him being captured rather than penetrated. I’m not saying it did happen but if this speculation someday pans out to be true then it would still tie in the original definition as part of the whole tradition of shifts in government. This would be somewhat enlightening.
How would this lead to another show of gynocentrism, though, were it true? The fact that they used “queen” in reference to him, hinting that a homosexual encounter would still need a partner to take a pampered ‘female’ role in any form of sexual intercourse by what I’m sure they used to mock him after the fact. This was a common view of the act in their culture. This is another obvious example of gynocentrism.
So now we’ve proven that despite their image as a patriarchal civilization they are still gynocentric as a whole.Now how does this lead into the fall? Perhaps ironically this is seen in how Emperor Nero’s female family affected his judgements and took advantage of his extreme paranoia. Leave it to Milo Yiannopoulos to choose the most gynocentric emperor in Roman history as his online handle. Granted Milo does have his own gynocentrisms to deal with as do we all. I for example do everything I can for my wife and typically prefer female company to male company. I am working on this as best as I can by trying to bolster my relationships with my father, father in law, as well as my son and some of the more reasonable men at my ‘day job,’ at the same time hoping to red pill said men for their own sake… But I digress.
Emperor Nero of course had his mother, Agrippina, who was not only regent during his younger days via the image of her as the divine widow of Claudius, her uncle, who adopted her son from an earlier union and renamed him Nero. Gotta love that regal incest huh? But after he fully ascended to his role as Emperor she became his prime adviser, albeit informally, although soon after his tutor and adviser Seneca the Younger and Praetorian Guard Burrus convinced him to remove her from her station. A lot of family drama ensued and led to a lot of violence and death. A mother’s love huh? His advisers saw her as destructive and dangerous to the empire as a whole and with how things ended after Nero’s reign under so much of her influence, we could say they were proven right.
But does this mean that gynocentrism is what ended up destroying Rome? All we are seeing here is one woman who held a very prestigious position at a key time. What we need to look at here is how she was able to amass so much power. She was the grandchild and great grandchild of imperial lineage before her marriage to her uncle. This gave her access to the power when she was wed due to the existence of an eldest son from her line. Due to the incestuous nature, she was also a sister to her uncle, which could attribute to the mental issues that Nero ended up having. So what we have here is an intersection of rite by purity of blood and gynocentrism leading to policies that led to the downfall of the greatest empire of the Classical ages.
What does this mean for our current age then if we see even a sliver of gynocentrism caused such a downfall? What we see is what would have, and may still be happening, due to Hillary Clinton. Its clear to all of us that Obama saw Clinton as his Heir Apparent. This is displayed with his signing into law of the NDAA 2017, which puts the CIA and Pentagon in charge of the FCC to ensure the Orwellian censorship she desired, and his rhetoric over the past few days that seeks a hot war with Russia before Trump can take control and potentially de-escalate the current level of unrest. These actions are those of a psychotic ideologue who sees his desire for world domination coming to an end and pushing desperate measures to ensure the deaths of millions.
These are frightening events that are going down today, but what can we do to counter them? There are two things we can do at this point to try to counter this if you are in the United States. First, contact your senators and congressmen and let them know your concerns about the part of the NDAA that violates the First Amendment and request that a bill be introduced to strike it from existing law. I’m certain if this were tested by the Supreme Court they would shoot that provision out of the water. It should not be difficult, then, to convince representatives in congress to take action. The second is to notify @realDonaldTrump via twitter of this heinous act and request that he see what he can do to rework that aspect as soon as he gets into power. We have a long fight ahead of us with this crap but the more we wake people up to the insanity that was revealed this year, with our technological capabilities we may be able to get our civilization back on track, therefore preventing the fall of the United States, arguably the Rome of our age.
I don’t see myself as a brilliant writer per se. However I do consistently amaze myself at the conclusions I’m able to come to with levels of historical information I delve into. I hope you are equally amazed, but as always if you are not then please comment below and add to my research and perspectives with your own. That’s why the comment section is there. I want to be challenged, to be proven wrong, and most importantly to improve all our overall knowledge. This is the only way we can combat regressive thoughts and ideas. So please, chime in, no one has done that with any of my articles for the past few weeks and I find it concerning. Thank you as always for your time and please remember to Game Freely!
- Breaking the Narrative Episode 124: Nice Try Kotaku! This Won’t Work Though! - July 8, 2019
- Breaking the Narrative Episode 123: We Shouldn’t Go Straight to Mars! How Anime Got Space Right! - July 1, 2019
- Breaking the Narrative Episode 122: You’re Reviewing What Now? The Dissenter Web Browser! - June 10, 2019
by 
Things you should research in tying gynocentrism to the fall of Rome is Taxation under the Republic and under the Empire, both early and later. There were steep increases to the taxation system, debasing of Roman coinage and eventual taxation paid with Goods and Services. Some of that Taxation had the aim of incentivising Bachelors give up their lifestyle and marry with higher taxes for single men. It is well worth looking into the Economic, Tax and Legal History of Rome. There are gems that point to the hypothesis.
Something that I discovered, was Romes’s unquenchable thirst for Silk from China. Vast sums of gold went East to China for the purchase of Fine Silk for Women’s Clothing. This vast influx of wealth brought about a decline in the Han Dynasty because of corruption, ending in a War of Succession in China which lasted for well over 100 years. The size of the forces deployed were staggering, some in excess of 3/4 of a Million Soldiers. I can’t recall if Rome had ever deployed such a large force in one encounter, but the Army of Cao Wei did so in their early invasion of Sun Wu. You could say that the Romans indirectly funded this War in China. The Successful Warriors of this era were rewarded not only with Gold, Jewels and Weapons, but with Bolts of Silk.
I just wanted to comment that I have finished your article and find the hypothesis fascinating. It is an avenue of interpretation Ive never encountered and look forward to seeing it developed.
I believe the fall had multiple causes and the idea of extreme gynocentrism, until proven otherwise, merits examination.
As you would expect, the majority of what I have read about ancient Rome points to it being an exclusively patriarchal system. But logic and experience lend credence and lead one to the conclusion that women were not without influence on the downfall of that society.
I believe In a healthy society male/female work to compliment one another, not compete.