RE: Gardner controversy (LGBT issues in Wicca)
Recently a Core (meaning the 4 of us who started this and who are most heavily involved in the group on a regular basis) Oly Witch Crew member posted a rant about Gerald Gardner, which received over 1000 notes and made a Wiccan high priest upset. ( @judd051 ) He felt that we were unfair about Gardner and had been misled by some poor research. He made some interesting points which I am researching still. I have been swamped with homework for my class so my rebuttal has been delayed. I wanted to take the time to research in depth the sources my debate opponent referred to and that is still in process.
TW: Homohobia, Queerphobia
However, another discussion got very intense on a pagan forum on a site where i spend a lot of time. It centered around issues members of the queer and LGBT community have with Wicca. In particular we talked about the heterosexual focus and gender polarity of god/goddess (which is actually Duotheistic, not polytheistic, ) and how that can be alienating. Someone named Silveroak, a cis straight man, got really angry and accused me and my peers of “slandering” wicca. Lots of mansplaining going on. I felt a need to respond with a thorough as possible understanding of the kind of man Gerald Gardner was. Me and my partner immersed ourselves in his books, especially the Gardnerian book of Shadows and Witchcraft Today.
Thus my rebuttal will come in two sections:
1. Gerald Gardners extremely problematic stance on LGBT people, gender, women, male/female polarity, and sexuality.
2. Gerald Gardners research, scholarship, and aspects of both which I consider highly questionable.
I will be focusing on #1 today, primarily with quotes.
“The Wicca should give due worship to the Gods and obey their will, which they Ardane, for it was made for the good of the Wicca, As the [5] Wicca’s worship is good for the Gods, For the Gods love the Wicca. As a man loveth a woman, by mastering her, so the Wicca should love the Gods, by being mastered by them. And it is necessary that the Circle, which is the Temple of the Gods, should be truly cast and purified, that it [10] may be a fit place for the Gods to enter. And the Wicca should be properly prepared and purified, to enter into the presence of the Gods. With love and worship in their hearts they shall raise power from their bodies to give power to the Gods, as has been taught us of old, [15] For in this way only may man have communion with the Gods, for the Gods cannot help man without the help of men.” (Gardner, page 64 from the Gardnerian Book of Shadows)
Apparently a man can only love a woman by “mastering” her. This means that the only type of love Gardner considers valid is one based on domination and an unequal power relationship.
Lois Bourne, one of the High Priestesses of the Bricket Wood coven, who was initiated by Gardner, had this to say about him:
“Gerald was homophobic. He had a deep hatred and detestation of homosexuality, which he regarded as a disgusting perversion and a flagrant transgression of natural law…. ‘There are no homosexual witches, and it is not possible to be a homosexual and a witch’ Gerald almost shouted. No one argued with him.[5]“
Bourne, Lois Dancing with Witches. (2006) London: Robert Hale. ISBN 0-7090-8074-3. p.38. (Hardback edition first published 1998).
It is important to mention that gardner initiated Lois Bourne and so she knew him personally for years.
Some will claim that modern wiccans venerating a homophobic priest, living by his rules, and defending him dogmatically doesnt have any effect on how they treat LGBT people. that would be the most obvious possible case of a logical fallacy. Not to mention that Dianic Wiccans bar entrance to trans women. ( Adler, Margaret (2006). Drawing down the moon: witches, Druids, goddess-worshippers, and other pagans in America. Penguin Books. p. 126.)
here are some more quotes from Gardner himself.
”a woman may impersonate either the God or the Goddess, but a man may only impersonate the God.“ (The Priestess and the Sword) page 27 of the Gardnerian BOS
commentary: In other words if you are assigned male at birth, you cannot embody the goddess, and any attempt to do so would be seen as illegitimate impersonation.
”The Knights of the Temple, who used mutually to scourge each other in an octagon, did better still; but they apparently did not know the virtue of bonds and did evil, man to man" (The Gardnerian book of Shadows)
In Witchcraft today, he speaks on the same subject this way:
“ The witches tell me: ‘The law always has been that power must be passed from man to woman or from woman to man, the only exception being when a mother initiates her daughter or a father his son, because they are part of themselves.’ (The reason is that great love is apt to occur between people who go through the rites together.)
They go on to say: ‘The Templars broke this age-old rule and passed the power from man to man: this led to sin and in so doing it brought about their downfall.’ ”
Excerpt From: Gardner, Gerald B. “Witchcraft Today.” page 69.
All male spiritual groups are evil, apparently? This Wiki article has this to say in Gardners defense:
However, the above quote is in the context of a section in Gardner’s book examining why the Templars were executed by the Christian Church, so it is entirely possible that the reference is not to Gardner’s own opinion of homosexuality but that of earlier Christians. Gardner goes on to defend the Templars by saying that the charges against them were “trumped up”.
This doesnt explain a few things:
1. First of all, what is the deal with “the witches tell me” without any citation, reference, or specifics about who these people are and where they got their information from? If I wrote a book on an important subject and said “an old man in a blue hat told me…” and called it a day, people would think i was a shitty scholar and i would be. why is gerald gardner any different? Is it not at least possible that he is making up vague nonexistent witches so he can pass of his own bad ideas as someone elses and thus shield himself from direct criticism?
2. Looking at the way Gardner treated the subject in the Gardnerian book of shadows, you can clearly see the phrase “They did evil, man to man”
3. Gardner waffling on an aspect of the issue doesn’t change the fact that he is clearly stating that the reason why initiations always must happen in a heterosexual context is because the rites produce “great love”. clearly he is afraid of ‘great love’ between same sex partners. Saying the charges against the Templars were trumped up is such an obvious fact that him admitting such does not amount to anything. Everyone knows the charges were trumped up. Its like if someone said I was scum for being trans, and then, when I got put in jail for killing the mayor with mental laser beams, the transphobe admits “those are trumped up charges” and people assume he is a trans ally.
4. The idea that the Templars sinned by use of male/male initiations and this led to their downfall is fucking bullshit. This basically implies that they are to blame for their arrest, interrogation, and brutal torture. This dishonors every witch ancestors who endured those agonizing times. The church was evil and abusive and corrupt. You dont blame the heretic, you blame the oppressor!!! To imply that if only the Templars had done this or that they would have been spared places the blame on THEM, thus placing no blame on the church, even though it was the corrupt catholic church and the corrupt state that engineered the whole thing!
5. Even if this is just an idea that Gardner quoted, consider
A) even if these “witches” were actual people (and not just a construct so that gardner could conceal that these were HIS ideas, remember there is no citation of who these people are) Gardner, when quoting them, makes no analysis that would show how such ideas dishonor the struggle of heretics and witches in that brutal time.
B) When he talks about the same subject in the GBOS, he states it as his idea, not as an idea a mysterious vague “witch” told him, AND he specifically uses the word “sin”. Why the fuck should witches even believe in “sin”?
6. Are we seriously supposed to believe that if the Templars had just been more heterosexual and had involved more heterosexuality in their rituals, the Catholic Church would have left them alone? WTF?
(The Templars, by the way, were involved in the crusades which were one of the most racist atrocities in all of world history. so fuck them. I am not worshipping the Templars or saying they were perfect or heroes or total victims. I am just focusing on the specific case of their persecution as heretics. I am just saying that blaming them for their persecution as heretics excuses the church from responsibility, sets a dangerous precedent and dishonors the struggles of the past.)
But this is one of the worst of all:
[5] It hath been found that this practice doth often cause a fondness between aspirant and tutor, and ‘tis a cause of better results if this be so. If for any reason it is undesirable that there be any great fondness between aspirant and tutor, this may be easily avoided, by both parties from the onset firmly resolving in their minds that if any doth ensue, it shall be that of brother and sister or parent and child.
And it is for this reason that a man may only be taught by a woman and a woman by a man, and that man and man, and woman and woman, should never attempt these practices together.And may all the Curses of the Mighty Ones be on any who make the attempt
(Page 32, Gardnerian Book of shadows, To Gain the Sight)
A CURSE. GARDNER LITERALLY WISHED A CURSE UPON ANY MALE/MALE or FEMALE/FEMALE GROUPS WHO DARED TO FORM MENTORING OR INITIATORY RELATIONSHIPS WITH EACH OTHER.
He is saying in no uncertain terms that homosexual acts in ritual, or any ritual in which men initiate each other, or women initiate each other, is evil and should be cursed by the GODS. That would include a huge portion of the Wolf Creek radical fairy community, which I am a part of. It would include the overwhelming majority of Short Mountain. According to Gardner, everyone on short mountain is evil because they are men initiating men and/or exploring homosexual intimacy in ritual.
Furthermore, the requirement of intimacy and touch is built into the rituals of the Gardnerian book of shadows, namely the 5 fold kiss. (which includes the vagina) Coupled with the idea that homosexual initiations are ‘evil’, that means that a (cis) woman, regardless of her sexual orientation, has to be initiated by a (cis) male.
If you see issues with Gardner, but you think the core of Gardnerian Wicca is basically good, and you want to build a tradition out of that which is LGBT inclusive, I can respect that. If you are a Gardnerian witch and see how he was a problematic figure, but due to investing your whole life in GW you feel you need to change it from the inside rather then leaving it entirely, I can respect that. If you are part of one of the other Wicca groups, such as the Feri Tradition, that seek to keep the ‘good’ parts of Wicca and discard the bad, I can respect that.
But…this man was homophobic. There is no way that that homophobia and heavy focus on male/female polarity and heteronormativity did not in some form bias the rituals and affect the way they were put together. If you insist on believing, in spite of the evidence, that Gardnerian Wicca is flawless and perfect and that the man made no mistakes, you are not an LGBT ally. And do not fucking tell me that he was a product of his time, that is BS. Austin Osman Spare and Aleister Crowley lived during an even earlier more repressive time and both were bisexual and wrote about it openly at great risk. Admittedly they were problematic figures too, but I dont worship anyone as a hero, I look at what is good and what is bad and I do my best to salvage the past to build something healthy today. What Wiccans hold on to so desperately is the idea of a whole, intact, complete witch tradition, but the reality is that there is no such thing. Its all ripped up bits and scraps and a collage of what is left, and accepting that is the only logical starting point, in my perspective. The author I quoted on this subject is a valid source, by the way, but that is, admittedly , a train of thought for the second section of my rebuttal, which I am not yet finished with.
Witch-mom, Olympia Witch Crew
P.S Ppl who i think might find this post interesting:
@curius-creature @psychicpictionary @goblinflower @the-needle-witch @ezmyrelda @rustbeltjessie @upthewitchypunx
