Rethinking "masculine" and "feminine" in Western magic
We all see it all the time. This plant has masculine energy. This crystal enhances feminine power. This ritual balances masculine and feminine forces. But what does any of that really mean?
After all, a plant does not have a gender. A crystal does not have a gender. Elements, planets, and celestial bodies do not have genders. So why is everything broken down into gendered categories in modern occult spaces?
The short answer: "Masculine" and "feminine" are shorthand terms that were developed by medieval alchemists, but modern occultists have lost that original context, leading to one-dimensional and reductive use of these terms.
The long answer: This model comes to us from Hermeticism by way of medieval alchemists. In the Hermetic model, the universe (or Prima Materia or Source or whatever) is a single whole divided into polarities -- sets of equal but opposite forces.
Here's a quote from the book Real Alchemy by Robert Allen Bartlett that I think explains this well:
"One of the earliest observations of Nature was that everything has its opposite -- day/night, male/female, hot/cold, wet/dry. The One divides into active and passive modes, with the active energy constituting the energies of life, and the passive one of the energy of matter.”
This idea was ridiculously widespread in the Middle Ages. To give just one example, Western traditional medicine (i.e., before modern medicine) was based on balancing the four humours by balancing opposite forces. So if you have inflammation, which is a hot and wet condition, you would treat it with herbal remedies that are cold and dry.
Early Hermeticists and alchemists classified different natural forces as either active or passive. Heat is active, cold is passive. Light is active, dark is passive. Fire (the force of transformation in alchemy) is active, while water (the universal solvent in alchemy) is passive. You get the idea.
Because of gender stereotypes in the Middle Ages and Renaissance, activeness eventually became associated with masculinity, and passiveness eventually became associated with femininity. You can still see this in old medical texts: Male bodies are hot and wet, but female bodies are cold and dry, so the medieval doctor should choose his treatment accordingly.
This has more to do with medieval European issues around gender than with nature or magic. My point here is that the gender stuff isn't literal: the Hermeticists did not literally believe that the planet Venus is female or that iron is male. Gendered terms were used as a shorthand to name opposites.
And even within medieval alchemical sources, gender is a spectrum! Let's take the elements as an example:
According to Bartlett, fire is the most active (“masculine”) element, while air is active but less active than fire. Water and earth are both considered passive (“feminine”) elements, but water is less passive/feminine than earth.
So, to recap: Hermetics believe in a perfect whole divided into polar opposites. Alchemists, doctors, and ceremonial magicians love this idea and run with it. Masculine/feminine is just one of many ways to describe these opposite forces. You could just as easily use active/passive to mean the same thing. And even in medieval times, each of these pairs of opposites was understood as a spectrum, with most energies falling somewhere between the two extremes.
The problem is that we've been playing a centuries-long game of telephone. Victorian occultists who were referencing Renaissance grimoires and still working in a vaguely Hermetic framework write in their books that, for example, roses have feminine qualities. A Wiccan author writing in the 1980s comes across this during their research and includes it in their book, but now it's one step further removed from that context. Several other authors repeat the claim that rose is feminine, all citing that one book from the '80s. Flash forward to 2025, and this claim is so removed from the original context that some witches genuinely believe rose is A Girl Flower because of some intangible Girlness inherent to the plant.
What does this mean for modern witches? Honestly, I think that kind of depends on the witch.
If you find working with masculine/feminine classifications helpful, I don't necessarily think you need to throw out that model. Just make sure you understand the background of these terms and remember that masculine/feminine in a magical sense is not the same as masculine/feminine in a gender sense. Maybe read up on Hermeticism, alchemy, and the other medieval and Renaissance occult systems that originated this model. Also, think about how using gendered terms in your practice is connected to your relationship with gender. How are you making space for nonbinary and agender energies and identities?
If you want to work with pairs of opposites but get weirded out by all the gender stuff, why not use a different polarity like active/passive or hot/cold to classify things instead? (This is how I classify herbs in my Southern Folk Magic practice.)
And if you don't particularly care about working with opposites in your practice, feel free to ignore this whole thing. There's no rule saying you have to label things this way.
