For a number of years, I’ve written about the so-called patriarchy, arguing it doesn’t truly exist — not in this weird world where women can do everything men can up to and including identifying as men.

But then I encountered Timothy J. Gordon, and my perception shifted. That's because Gordon, a self-described traditionalist Catholic, is a vocal advocate for the “online patriarchy." His ideas do not fit neatly into contemporary discourse; in fact, they brazenly reject it.

'I am not analogous to Andrew Tate any more than any Christian honestly attempting to live the true Faith would be to any smut-peddling, whoremongering warehouse-pimp in Eastern Europe.'

He goes into depth on his worldview in his new documentary, "What A Woman Is," which will be released this Valentine's Day.

For Gordon, patriarchy isn’t some nebulous bogeyman — it’s the natural order, divinely and biologically ordained, and society’s survival depends on its restoration. A lawyer turned philosopher in training, he mixes sharp arguments with no-nonsense critiques of the left, the Deep State, and what he sees as a society gone soft.

In other words, Gordon is a very interesting man. Think Jordan Peterson but without the word salad detours.

Digital dadosphere

“Patriarchy designates ‘power to fathers,’ meaning that God and nature clearly designed the family as having distinctly male leadership,” he tells me. “It doesn’t mean sex without consequences or that all women answer to all men. It means that individual fathers are the unequivocal leaders of their individual households.”

Gordon sees patriarchy as the backbone of functional society, an ancient organizing principle discarded at our peril. His vision is unapologetically hierarchical, rooted in scripture and 2,000 years of Christian tradition. According to Gordon, anything short of male-led households and all-male clergy is a “false gospel” that undermines Christianity itself.

Gordon’s concept of the “online patriarchy” is both niche and uncompromising. “Its core philosophy is Christianity, plain and simple,” he says, lamenting that even most Christians have been “totally brainwashed by feminists.” For Gordon, the patriarchy isn’t a metaphor for male dominance in boardrooms or politics — it’s about male authority within the family, a structure he believes is ordained by God and essential to human flourishing.

Critics might lump Gordon in with movements like the “red pill” community or men’s rights activists, but he rejects such comparisons outright. “The ‘red pill,’ ‘men’s rights,’ and ‘pick-up artistry’ do not constitute patriarchy,” he insists. “They categorically advise against men marrying, for sex before marriage, for contraception, and for the ‘empowerment’ of women in the workforce. Like feminists, they reject vital aspects of patriarchy.” Gordon believes that these movements are rife with impostors, and we should reject their philosophies.

Feminism as Original Sin

Gordon’s critique of modern feminism is also unsparing.

The American views it as nothing less than a “civilizationally subversive movement.” To him, feminism isn’t just political or social — it’s a theological betrayal rooted in the “Original Sin described in the Garden of Eden.” He frames it as “functional gender dysphoria,” a rebellion against God’s natural order. “Feminism convinces women that it is unhealthy to be feminine and salubrious to be masculine,” he argues. This rebellion, he claims, has dismantled families and plunged society into moral and spiritual chaos.

The push to force women into the workforce, Gordon says, is feminism’s most corrosive triumph. “Simone de Beauvoir famously urged the forcing of women; Betty Friedan countered her by suggesting that shaming ought to be the primary means. But the result was the same: misery and the destruction of the home.” Quoting Pope Pius XII, he underscores his point: “Equality of rights with man brought women’s abandonment of the home, where she reigned queen, and her subjection to the same work strain and hours, entailing depreciation of her true dignity and the solid foundation of her rights — her feminine role."

For Gordon, the fallout is undeniable. Citing studies like "The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness," he states, “Almost two-thirds of working women are plagued by chronic diarrhea and other such functional disorders. Women who leave the matrix of the American workforce quickly get restored to better mental and physical health. Their families become fundamentally happier.”

Crude as the claim may sound, diarrhea and all, he’s not entirely off the mark.

The Christian mandate for patriarchy

Central to Gordon’s philosophy is the belief that patriarchy is far more than a cultural relic — it’s a divine mandate, etched into scripture, upheld by Catholic tradition, and enforced by the magisterium.

“Roman Catholicism requires household patriarchy not only in Scripture, but also in its Tradition and Magisterium,” he asserts. He backs this claim with no shortage of evidence, quoting Pope Leo XIII’s 1891 encyclical "Rerum Novarum": “A family, no less than a State, is a true society, governed by an authority peculiar to itself, that is to say, by the authority of the father.”

He points to further examples in Catholic teaching. “Leo makes it clear that married women must be at home: ‘A woman is by nature fitted for home-work, and it is that which is best adapted at once to preserve her modesty and to promote the good bringing up of children and the well-being of the family.’”

He also highlights Pope Pius X’s unequivocal stance: “After creating man, God created woman and determined her mission, namely, that of being man’s companion, helpmeet, and consolation. ... It is a mistake, therefore, to maintain that women’s rights are the same as men’s.”

Gordon’s disdain for figures like Andrew Tate stems directly from this Christian framework. While both reject feminism, Tate, says Gordon, ends up perpetuating its core tenets.

“Tate advocates for feminism’s most basic elements: women in the workforce, free love, contraception, and the widespread avoidance of marriage,” Gordon argues. “Tate has convinced tens of thousands of men that they cannot reasonably hope to become happily married, which becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. It’s really, really evil.”

For Gordon, true patriarchy is inseparable from faith, and anything less is just another distortion of the divine order.

“I am not,” he stresses, “analogous to Andrew Tate any more than any Christian honestly attempting to live the true Faith would be to any smut-peddling, whoremongering warehouse-pimp in Eastern Europe.”

The Moon-Beesly complex

One of Gordon’s more provocative takes is his critique of how media subtly undermines the appeal of marriage. He calls this phenomenon the “Moon-Beesly complex,” drawing inspiration from two beloved sitcom characters, Daphne Moon (of "Frasier") and Pam Beesly (of "The Office").

He explains: “Each transforms violently during their fictitious marital engagements, going from lovely and amicable young maidens who admire their future husbands ex ante, to spiteful married hags who actively subvert and resent their husbands ex post.”

For Gordon, this transformation isn’t just a storytelling trope — it’s a deliberate narrative designed to sour audiences on the idea of marriage. His theory holds up when you consider other iconic portrayals of married women. From Debra Barone (of "Everybody Loves Raymond"), constantly nagging and tired, to Carrie Heffernan (of "King of Queens"), perpetually frustrated with her husband’s antics, the pattern is undeniable.

Conversely, the depiction of married men is hardly flattering. From Homer Simpson to Peter Griffin, and even as far back as Al Bundy in "Married… with Children," husbands are cast as bumbling fools, barely tolerated by their exasperated wives. More recently, Hal from "Malcolm in the Middle" and Phil Dunphy from "Modern Family" carry on this tradition of the lovable but hapless dad, clueless about family dynamics and often the butt of every joke.

Fighting back

For Gordon, the media’s relentless portrayal of marriage as a joyless trap is no accident. “Disincentivizing marriage is the clear purpose of this vast psy-op,” he argues. But he insists this narrative is entirely false. “My own wife of nearly twenty years has borne me seven children and is stunningly beautiful, thin, submissive, friendly, and the most enthusiastically helpful person I’ve ever known.”

Despite the grim cultural tide, Gordon sees hope. “Yes, today’s average woman has been poisoned with bad ideas,” he admits. “But Christian women can be pulled out of the matrix, just as men can be. We are helping to do so in encouraging numbers.” For him, this is the essence of the “online patriarchy” — not some performative fantasy of playing farmer or homesteader but a practical call to action.

“We are just telling young Christian people of all three major types (Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant) that aside from being ordained a priest, getting married at a young age — prior to being morally and sexually corrupted, if possible — provides the best opportunity to lead a good, natural, Scriptural, Christian path to paradise,” he concludes. Gordon’s vision is clear, his message even more so.

Marriage isn’t a burden; it’s a calling from the man above.