Zagadka

*shrugs* That's fine by me, define it how you want. I'm not Wiccan, though I do participate in various Wiccan groups from time to time (hard to find pagans around here).

But may I point out that you sould like an orthodox Jew or Catholic saying that all of the other forms of Judaism/Christianity are heresy. Considering how "new age" the Wiccan movement is (and it is new age, not "rooted in ancient traditions"), I'd think you would be more enlightened than that.

Wads4

How about the Great Invisible Pink Unicorn?

Heathen Dawn

Merry meet!

Now, now, Shven—it’s OK to be bigoted in private, but public displays of fundamentalism aren’t the way to go.

I’ve had a debate on this on a pagan board, and I concluded by saying, “you can call me a Wiccoid if it makes you happy, but I’m going to keep calling myself a Wiccan.”

After all, AT&T did say all operating systems based on its original Unix had to be called a different name. That’s why we have Solaris, AIX, IRIX, Ultrix, HP-UX and all the rest. But they’re all still Unixes. The only one that isn’t an offshoot of Unix is Linux, which has no original Unix source code (SCO’s arguments to the contrary be damned), but it’s a Unix too, because it imitates Unix’s functionality; but you can call it a Unixoid if it makes you happy.

brighid

Venus is faceless and handless because she was destroyed by Christians. She is only pornographic to the Westernized eye. Is David pornographic? You miss important aspects of Diana as she in not only a virgin and she certainly isn't the demure virgin Christianity desires women to be. Nor is even Vesta described in relation to men and child bearing. Women bare children by choice. They chose their lovers and aren't chattle that simply "breed". Vesta was not a "breeder" as was Mary and every other Christian woman. You are looking at the pantheons through the eyes of Christianity.

"Playing" with images? Power over self can be "taken", power over others can only be done with "force." Why would I want power over others? Social, economic and political power come and have come, but first I must have power over myself. I must view myself not as the submissive virgin, responsible for original sin, only redeemable through the pain of child birth, who shall be silent and must always obey my father or husband. This is the Christian archetype of the female. Feminine power is to be found within, but when you grow up in a society where both the divine and the mundane emulate narrow and weak definitions of women many women find the need to look elsewhere. One place is to ancient archetypes where women were not merely virgins, where they were not weak, etc. This is where the pantheon can be and is useful to some women.

We know plenty about the Goddesses and female archetypes of old. We may not have as complete pictures as we would like, but we do not need that. We have enough. Diana was a virgin by choice, not because it was her duty as a woman. Therein is the difference.

Brighid

brighid

You are having a hard time finding pagans in Cali?? WOW, that is suprising. Have you ever checked out withcvox.com for local meetups?

I agree with you about Shven. No one has the authority to narrowly define "Wicca" for others, only for themselves. It goes against the entire spirit of what I know to say that someone isn't "wiccan enough" and it's not different that other religious bigotries and is a fallacy at that ... no true Scotsman.

B

Jackalope

Whoops, I almost missed this one. The term "sheila-na-gig" is of uncertain providence and is not used in archeology anymore. The term "female exhibitionist figure" is used because there is considerable doubt that these figures had anything to do with pre-christian practices or that the term "sheila-na-gig" was the original name for them. Among the evidence against pre-christian survival would be similar figures seen on french church decorations as part of depictions of vice. In those cases, the female figures exposing their genitals often clearly have venerial disease.

I think we can plonk that myth alongside the "mother goddess" statues of Catalhoyuk (the ones that turned out to have vulture heads when they finally found some complete ones).

Jackalope

Whoa Lady, you're getting too het up. Venus of Willendorf! No christian messed with that little figurine. The unknown paleolithic artist who carved it gave her no face, hands, or feet. Almost no head, if you look at the thing. I know you're irritated, but do try and keep your archeological finds straight if you're going to flame people over them.

Heathen Dawn

You know, that’s the main reason I absolute can’t stand scholarship: the placing of every cherished belief under critical scrutiny. It’s why I say, to hell with scholarship.

brighid

Jackalope, I flamed no one. I simply had my statues mixed up. It is not my area of expertise. The vision of the Venus statue I had was defaced by Christians and I do not find the naked female form in art to be pornographic simply because the female (or male) form is naked.

As to the Sheila-na-gig, I would have to do much more extensive research to make any argument for or against your claim and at the moment I do not have the time I would like to do so. I would even have to look at the origins of the particular statue that I have in mind which has no depiction of veneral disease, nor have I heard that particular point before (not to claim it isn't valid because I have not heard it).

Just to set the record straight - I am not archaelogist nor am I an expert in ancient artifacts or even art. So please do not chastise me, and understand that I am not irritated, nor do I even have "heated" or negative feelings about this subject. I was merely having a discussion, anything you may have taken from my text or projected upon it are in my opinion, misinterpreted.

Brighid

This is the figure I thought of with Sheila-na-gig .... no veneral diseases I can see ... http://www.pantheon.org/areas/galler...la-na-gig.html

http://www.sciencedaily.com/encyclopedia/sheila-na-gig

Interesting read about this particular discussion from a non-Eurocentric/patriarchial/Christian point of view ... http://www.suppressedhistories.net/articles/icons.html (although I certainly do not have the time to discuss it indepthly and merely meant as informative.)

Shven

I already said that I'm not a wiccan and that Gardnerian Wicca recognises other religions as valid. Its like a Catholic priest saying that going to church does not make you a member of the clergy.