You said:
For the entire span of human existence, we centered gender relations around the fact that men are active in sex and women are passive. This is a myth. Men have the capacity to be both active AND passive. Thus, we could divide men into two classes - tops and bottoms - and restructure our family unit into one with three genders instead of two. Doing so would confer great benefits on society.
>men get a boywife AND two wives (the ones he and his bottom would get individually in our current system)
>there are fewer tops than women and bottoms, so gynocentrism vanishes
>men enjoy the benefits of service and obedience from their three partners
>bottoms don't have to worry about responsibility or decision making
>only men work; fewer people in the workforce means higher wages, better jobs
>also no more incompetent workers
>four people sharing a home, more affordable
>also more people among whom to divide housework
>still a closed, committed relationship, so none of the downsides of free love
Thus far no one has demonstrated to me why these benefits would be a bad thing.
Anticipating counterarguments:
>you're gay and this is just your fetish
Correct, but that doesn't make my logic less sound
>it's not my heccin wholesome tradcath relationship!!
Yeah, traditional marriage is working SO well for us. You only support it because you grew up with it.
>men should be masculine/I wouldn't personally want to be a bottom
We've brainwashed men into believing that they have to be dominant and manly or they're failures. Really, a man submitting to his partner is just as valid as a man who dominates.
>I don't want a boywife that's gay
Don't have sex with him, just make him do housework. He's your property you can do whatever you want with him.