From: dwbutler@mtu.edu (Daniel W. Butler-Ehle) Subject: Re: ADF, Witchcraft & Stuff Date: 5 Jul 1994 03:07:31 -0400 lewis johnson (ljohnso@bgsu.edu) wrote: > I have been following the discussion in alt.pagan now for a few > months and reading books I see recommended. I am getting the > impression that Wicca (at least here in the U.S.) is almost > exclusively the domain of women (womyn [?]) and gay males. Am I > mistaken? Is it as much, or more, a political movement as a > self-exploration movement? Nota Bene: Take everything I say with a grain of salt. For every statement I make about neopaganisn, there are a couple dozen people itching to flame me into the ground. Neopagan views enjoy a wonderous variety. What follows is merely one person's interpretation. When we were active, our group seemed to have a dead-even ratio of male to female, no matter how many times the membership changed (made choreographing rituals easier, 'cuz of the symmetry). Far as I know, they are all heteros, but sexual orientation wasn't really an issue of much importance. However we weren't exclusively Wiccan; there was a sprinkling of Druids, Odinists, and such among our members. Anyway, let me explain some things about the perceived feminist bent to neopaganism. When I first began seriously looking into it, I read Starhawk and Adler. It wasn't what I was expecting; suddenly Wicca seemed to be just some women's movement. While standing on the front line of such a movement would be a worth- while endeavour, it just wasn't what I was looking for. I wanted spiritual development as a human, not exercise in helping promote the oppressed half of our society. (In 70s English: "I needed time for me.") So I read other stuff, then went back to Starhawk and Adler. Believe me, they're different the second time around. The strong focus on the Goddess is not a focus on women. The Goddess is female, but the Goddess is not a woman. The God is male, but the God is not a man. Wiccans simply divide aspects into male and female. All men and women have both male and femal aspects in this sense, and we just use the concepts of the Goddess and the God to represent those aspects. Well, that said, you may then wonder "If female and male characteristics are something the women and men both share in then why is there so much emphasis on the Goddess?" Well, it all deals with balance. Look at our modern western society. A couple centuries of expansion and technological progress and asserting ourselves over the land. Now we run into problems. Expansion and assertion are considered male aspects. There is nothing inherently wrong with the notions, but they must be balanced with the female traits (remember, "female" here does not mean "coming from woman", and "male" does not mean "coming from man") of nurture and conservation. The current emphasis on the Goddess is to bring the balance. Maybe in fifty years, we may have lost direction and need to emphasize the male aspects again. Anyway, keep in mind that "Goddess" and "God" and "female" and "male" in Wicca are just names for particular collections of aspects. Be careful not to interpret the relationship as "women are closer to the Goddess than men". > I am not saying that there is a problem with women and gay males > having their own organizations. Rather, I wonder if there are > a-political covens, or covens where male & female sexuality are > viewed on par with neither being submersed? Certain types do seem to feel particularly comfortable with the Earth-based religions. And I think that many hetero men are drawn to it for the same reason: they just can't accept the roles that western society wants us to take. Just as western society OPpresses women, it also REpresses much that is within a man. When a culture won't let you be you, you either repress yourself or you find a culture that allows it. Dan