-
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
Daly's books, you'll know what I mean.
I myself identify as a feminist Goddess-oriented neo-Pagan, as well as a
Satanist. Indeed, feminist Goddess religion is still my primary religious
identification. (Satanism is how I relate to "male" energy.) I don't and
never did call myself a feminist "Wiccan".
By the way, while I accept today's use of the word Wicca (with a capital
W) to refer to a specific European-based religion with a very specific
worldview, I do not accept the attempt by Wiccans to copyright the words
"witch" and "witchcraft". These words are generic terms, not the property of
any one religion. They refer to occult practices found in many religions
around the world. A Satanist has as much right to the word "witch" as
anyone else. (It so happens that I don't call myself a "witch", but for a
different reason: I think many "witches" are making exaggerated claims to
occult power, and I don't want to give the appearance of making such an
exaggerated claim.)
Women vs. Men
"Ok folks, Loki and I have been chatting, and we're ready to raise a ruckus
that might go on for months."
Chiniginish and I relish the challenge... with Coyote looking over our shoulders
and chuckling...
"Here's the question: Are women superior to men, and if so, why? I think
that women are superior to men in the modern world because evolution is
lagging society. Most of the evolution of the human race (about 60 million
yrs) took place in hunter/gatherer tribes, where aggressive behavior on the
part of the male hunters was a survival trait, and relating/caring behavior
was a survival trait for females. Now, in the 20 thousand or so years since
we have become agrarian, the need for male hunter aggressiveness has gone
the way of the Dodo, while the need for relating/caring behavior has become
primary. Where does this leave us?
"Well, as I see it, women are almost ideally suited to the overcrowded,
communication-intensive environment that we call modern society. Men, on the
other hand, are like people with no arms playing handball. It's not that we're
bad folk, it's just that we were designed by evolution for an environment
that hasn't existed for 20 thousand years, which is a real drop in the
bucket in terms of evolution. Evolution isn't going to be giving us any help
for at least a few million years; maybe never since we are constantly
screwing up the gene pool with our wars that leave the genetically defective
to breed and send the genetically preferable off to evolutionary dead ends.
So all we men can do is try to better ourselves and ask for patience on
the part of women, who must feel like the entire male sex has completely
missed the boat."
Well, you've got a nice point, but it assumes something that I believe
'taint necessarily so. Is male aggressiveness part of nature or nurture?
The jury seems to be coming back from a long period of deliberation, and it
looks like the verdict is nurture.
This very nicely dovetails with my own theory of what thelemites refer to
as the "procession of the aeons". In Crowley's notorious Liber Al vel Legis,
we are said to be passing from an aeon of belief in suffering male gods and
patriarchy to an aeon of belief in the value of Self and of partnership
between the sexes. Crowley called the old aeon the "Aeon of Osiris" and the
new the "Aeon of Horus, the Crowned and Conquering Child." The enthroned
Child is not masculine or feminine, but androgynous/gynandrous. The aeon
before the Osirian was that of Isis, an aeon of Great Mother Goddesses
and matriarchy.
My chronology is a little different than that which Crowley attributed to
these three epochs of human history so far. Crowley declared that the Aeon
of Horus began with the Spring Equinox of +1904 Common, just before the
writing of the Book of the Law. I maintain that the change is still taking
place, and had its roots in the +1700s Common. The writings of the
philosopher Locke were some of the first to make a very important quantum
jump, and provided ideological impetus for the vital changes that have and
are taking place.
What Locke asserted was that government did not rest on Divine Right, but
on the consent of the governed. Human beings were not born to different
castes, some fated to serve while others were fated to rule by the grace
of the gods. Human beings were born equal, and had certain rights as a
birthright: Life, Liberty, the right to pursue Happiness, and the right to
security of private property.
This assertion shows up in Liber Al as these statements:
"Every Man and Every Woman is a Star."
"Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law." "Love Is
The Law, Love Under Will."
"Thou hast no right but to do thy Will."
In a little less arcane language, these statements run thusly:
Every Individual matters.
Every Individual has the right to live, be free and pursue Happiness
(harmony with one's life's purpose, or True Will) as they Will.
These rights stop at the boundary of the Wills of others. Live your life as
you see fit, but mind your own business and above all, harm nobody. This [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ] - zanotowane.pl
- doc.pisz.pl
- pdf.pisz.pl
- matkadziecka.xlx.pl