BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Temple >

Magic Without... Women?

  
  

Page: (1)23

 
 
beautifultoxin
18:15 / 30.09.05
(A bounce-off from the Generation Hex thread, where it's been noted that once again, a Disinfo book's contributors are mostly male.)

Women got me onto Barbelith. Women got me into the Invisibles. Women were the first to practice magic with me in a group, to form long-lasting training circles, to initiate me.

It just seems like men are usually the last to notice that we're all here.

(Shortest. Thread. Ever. But here you go, if there's men who feel like doing some work to tease out these issues, rather than having women lecture at them.)
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
18:44 / 30.09.05
I think maybe we could profit from clarifying what the question is. What are we actually asking here--Where are the women in magic? Where are the women in chaos magic? In Generation Hex? In this particular forum?

It might be useful to start by asking if men and women possibly feel called to different paths, and if so why this might be. F'rinstance, the massive majority of my healer's group are female and if they have a magical practice it tends to be some varitey of earth-based work (for want of a better word). I have met far more female Wiccans in my time than male. However, this forum seems to have rather more regular male than female posters--which seems odd, since Barbelith as a whole is generally pretty good at being anti-sexist.

Are women put off by the kinds of magic that the regulars here are interested in? How might we characterise the overall mix of the Temple (assuming that we even can, and assuming that it's a good idea)?
 
 
Sekhmet
21:00 / 30.09.05
Perhaps women are simply less open and vocal about their practice?
 
 
beautifultoxin
22:48 / 30.09.05
MC: "I think maybe we could profit from clarifying what the question is. What are we actually asking here..."

Definitely -- here's where I usually jump off:

Wicca/Witchcraft/Earth Magic/Rainbow Ass Faeries (and I am one, hey!) is feminized in these parts, in a way that it is simply isn't in those neopagan communities, which are not only faily balanced, but damn well genderfucked. Whereas my time in CM/chaote/Thelemic/OTO circles (again, a not so elegant shorthand) have been not only male-dominated, but white/het/moneyed male-dominated. It's a particular demographic that is, in the larger society, apt to feminize work (here, we extend work to magical work) that has an individual, emotional, or nature-based POV.

I had thought, due to my entry in this scene (if there indeed is one, and we're talking late 90's here), that the chaote current was much more queer-flavored, more gender-balanced, a scene where being the girl didn't mean you were automatically some Scarlet Woman (hey, I am). I found that not to be the case, and have, in my mind, come to think of Barbelith as a predominantly male-dominated space. Again, it's the Net. I could be so completely wrong.

More in a bit.
 
 
LVX23
02:08 / 01.10.05
Labels aside, just about all of my work has been ultimately for nuit and luna (and their various other masks). To my mind, any person advancing along a spiritual/soulful path should naturally move towards the middle. The masculine should integrate the feminine, and the feminine should integrate the masculine.

There may be some valid generalizations in suggesting that the earth-based pagan strains lean towards embracing the feminine and, as such, have more dominant female voices. Similarly, the solar groups (OTO, GD, Chaos to some degree) tend to be more masculine (as one might expect).

As noted, perhaps the first line of enquiry is where does the Temple fall along this gradient? Second might be, given the deeply personal nature of occult prctice, is it more likley that a male practitioner would gravitate towards a male writer?
 
 
Isadore
03:07 / 01.10.05
First, I rephrase the thread topic into: "Why do non-earth magic communities appear male-skewed?"

There're lots of factors at play here, obviously. The one that intrigues me is perception; I postulate that people tend to assume a gender-neutral figure to be male in a tradition one expects to be male-dominated, whereas in a female-dominated environment, a gender-neutral figure is more likely perceived as female. We are all gender-neutral online until we choose to fuck it up. (Writing style and topic analysis aside, but that again relies on quite a bit of stereotyping; am I male because I study engineering? Am I female because I like to cook?)

For instance, I know a lot of female role-players and computer gamers both (with quite a bit of overlap). The Nobilis pencil & paper group I'm currently running is half and half; the last (steampunk Gurps) group I played in had a ratio of three women to every man. Yet I am often told with all seriousness that there are no women gamers, or that very few females play computer games or role-play, prompting the inevitable question, "Are you blind, stupid, or both?"

Pertinent nugget from another thread I read just now: one of trouser the trouserian's comments thread regarding the Golden Dawn:
"Christina Oakley was saying last night (stupendous lecture on "Women of the Golden Dawn") that thus far, no one has really done any comprehensive work (apart from Mary Greer's book "Women of the Golden Dawn") on the contributions of Annie Horniman, Moina Mathers or Florence Farr, for example."

Perhaps the problem is not entirely that there are no women (or very few) in solar magic communities; perhaps women are invisible. Hell, I don't know. I'm new. I don't know this community that well. But I do know that I doubt Barbelith - or anywhere - is quite so androcentric as all that.
 
 
*
06:37 / 01.10.05
The people writing the books on ceremonial/thelemic/xaotic/"high" magic (I think I'm going to imperfectly abbreviate this to "Western occultism") certainly seem to be predominantly male, whereas there seems to be a more even mix of female and male authors in the earth-based spirituality field. beautifultoxin made a point that reminded me of something I just mentioned in some other thread, that Western occultism seems to be a practice of the privileged. The cultural origins of Western occultism may have something to do with that. The roots of the practice are in medieval Europe— actual qabalah as understood by actual Jews, I believe, had very little to do with medieval high magic, except in that orientalism was a popular way of making things seem more mysterystical. There are important "tropes" in the traditions (excuse the scare quotes; it's not the right word but I can't think of a better one) such as black:white::evil:good, power comes from rare and expensive objects/substances/books, the Magician of the tarot is a male figure and this is important in the symbolic system, etc. It could also be argued that only the privileged have the leisure to concentrate on attaining the Knowledge and Conversation of One's Holy Guardian Angel(tm) rather than, say, attaining the Knowledge and Conversation of one's next meal, and a lot of Western occultism is centered around the "higher"-than-material concerns. These are glorified in a way which, now that I think about it, is a little gross as regards class issues— a lot of times practitioners whose concerns are material are portrayed as impure of heart or intent. Hierarchy and elitism permeates a lot of the Western occult tradition, something chaos practitioners have tried to get away from with some imperfect success.

So does this play into how accessible the tradition is for women? Wicca and nature spirituality of various sorts are designed to be particularly welcoming to female practitioners, but they still locate the value of the female in fertility and generation and reify gender roles which are not necessarily to the benefit of actual women. Personally, when I thought of myself as a woman, I felt more at home in earth-centered spirituality, although it was never a perfect fit. I slowly gravitated more towards ceremonial magic, and separately began to regard my gender as being more male. I can't be sure how these things affected one another, but I'm sure they did. More on that when I have introspected a bit more.
 
 
Quantum
14:47 / 01.10.05
It just seems like men are usually the last to notice that we're all here.

{Wayne's World} Are you mental? {/Wayne}

Seriously though, all the prominent people in the Tarot for example are women (or transgender male to female) most people who work in the new age industry are women, the majority of the consumers of 'magic' are women, I often feel in a minority.
Barbelith seems pretty unusually male-slanted, I suspect due to the bias toward discussion of theory, something dictated by the medium (and often decried) but really who knows.
 
 
Imaginary Mongoose Solutions
14:04 / 02.10.05
"Wicca/Witchcraft/Earth Magic/Rainbow Ass Faeries (and I am one, hey!) is feminized in these parts, in a way that it is simply isn't in those neopagan communities, which are not only faily balanced, but damn well genderfucked."

See, I think that is awesome. Sadly, in my experience with these same communities, I've found many of them to be outright hostile to men. I know, that's a horrible sterotype, but I've had my sex seen as a negative by so many Wiccans/ect that I've grown used to it. The only wiccan group I've personally encountered that didn't carry some sort of hardline sex/gender bias was a Gardenarian group who were borderline OTO in their practices, anyway.

And this makes me sad as I often feel more comfortable with "earth religion" practices than I do with other practices. That and I'm really not married to my gender identity.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
14:47 / 02.10.05
I've seen this with Wiccans myself, and pagans in general. Personally I find it obnoxious; anti-male bias has put me off several groups in the past that I would otherwise have enjoyed being part of.
 
 
beautifultoxin
02:59 / 03.10.05
On the percieved & experienced anti-male bias in some Wiccan/Pagan groups -- here's another place where the biases of the traditions themselves are going to engender (whatevs) behavior. The tradition of Witchcraft that I am initiated into is very fucking clear that our goal is not to elevate gender stereotypes to the level of cosmic truth, especially when talking about deity. So many Pagan groups are reductive to the point of impotence, ascribing an even more gender-polarized vision of male & female to the gods and to magical practice in general (Goddess Barbie, God Ken, ugh), than even the culture-at-large. This is wrongheaded, and makes for crap practice. Period.

Likewise, I've been a part of and witnessed many other magical groups, both earth-based and ceremonial, that double as a coming-of-age/consciousness-raising group for the practitioners, of every gender. Men, acknowledged or not, face their male shit, and women, often more explicitly, begin doing the "gender processing" of growing up female in a largely sexist world. When that work, noble and needed, overdetermines group dynamics and goal-setting, gender politics go flying without direction, and men can come out of it feeling attacked. I've been there. I've likely done that. Personally, I think it's part of growing up, best done amongst one's peers, and a process often facilitated by magical growth/education.

I'm not saying the women's groups/earth spirituality have it right -- often they've just got other shit a comparable mess. What I want to challenge is the notion that magic is for boys and witchcraft is for girls. I proposed that a possible, at least partial culprit, was the sexism (and classism, just as likely) within "western occultism" that ascribes femininity to anything earth-based; that percieves "real magic" to be theoretical, solar, masculine, loud and incanted versus whispered into the night or what have you. Hegemonic sexism, regardless of how central a role women may play in X field at Y time in history, regardless of what contributions individuals may make to evolving magical practice and community, shapes the larger picture, and in turn, our basic drive to seek out community, solace, practice, evolution, or just a good ride. Is it really mental to suggest that men may not perceive this as vividly as women? It is sexist itself to suggest these divisions, high/earth, solar/lunar, active/receptive, even cock/cunt, without challenging our attirbutions and the power we are granting and witholding. That's why magical practice and community is hot and and a draw and carries ethical potential for me: that was pose these questions, that we don't take power for granted, that we for for the root. (Or is that, too, somehow "essentially" girly? I dare not suggest that it is somehow inherently masculine to accept power from on high without reflection. Right?)

To be proactive -- a decent example of where magic gets genderfucked for me -- which is what draws me to it, messing with creation's building blocks and finding power there -- is Lepidopteran's Orange & Black workings (I am biased), where earth/high magics are naturally comingled, and the approach is a synthesis of (stereo)typically masculine/feminine tactics. I had supposed the chaos current I had imagined Barbelith -> Temple to be driven by would produce more like that. When I hear folks talk about new magic for a new aeon or what have you, that's what I envision.
 
 
Chiropteran
13:08 / 03.10.05
Quantum, I don't mean to be rude, but what the shit are you talking about?

First, the Tarot thing is ridiculous and irrelevant: that's like saying that women dominate the advertising industry, because you see women in so many commercials. No one has questioned that the female image is prominent in "Western Occultism."

The "New Age industry," for better or worse, is pretty soundly denigrated (or at least ignored) by "The Serious Magickers," so the number of women involved in it is still not really the issue here (i.e. in this topic). As for women being the predominant "consumers of magic" (assuming for the moment that it's true), how does that balance against women's status as "producers of magic" (at least in terms of representation in occult publications and message boards, etc.)?

I'm sorry to single you out, Quantum, but I really was incredulous when I read your post.

And LVX, while the powers you are working with may be "feminine," we're talking about the role of actual human women in modern Western occultism, not the idealized masculine and feminine. Now, as you say, "one might expect" that "solar" magic perhaps tends to embrace the masculine while "earth-based pagan strains" tend to embrace the feminine. Why might one expect that? Because it has been traditional ("times being what they were"), or because that's "the way things are?" Do you think that there is something innate in those systems (and/or in men and women) that leads to this divide; in other words, is there some reason that runs deeper than (outdated) cultural bias? How are these trends reflected in the relative roles and status of actual men and women in these groups? (I'm not directing these questions soley at you, LVX, I'm just spinning off from your post.)

Wicca and nature spirituality...still locate the value of the female in fertility and generation and reify gender roles which are not necessarily to the benefit of actual women.

Yes, thank you - and that speaks right back to the earlier Tarot/Nuit and Luna statements.

The contribution of women to magic is (I hope) not in doubt. But it still bears questioning that Disinfo felt it necessary to set aside a separate section in The Book of Lies to discuss "Scarlet Women" as a special topic apart from "just plain ol' occultists," i.e. male occultists (I'm sure there's a "Women's History Month" thread in Headshop somewhere which addresses this particular dynamic), to say nothing of the gender-skew in the new Generation Hex. Even giving the editor (hi!) the benefit of the doubt and accepting that he published all the best essays submitted, in the limited space available, should we be alarmed that female-penned submissions to The New Occulture Handbook were so few or so inadequate? It alarms me.

I think the Disinfo thing bothers me particularly because these books are marketed as introductions to occultism - "initiatory portals" for the next generation of young magicians, yet they demonstrate (in my opinion) a fairly conservative - even retrogressive - approach to gender equity.
 
 
Chiropteran
13:24 / 03.10.05
(To quote myself...)

How are these trends reflected in the relative roles and status of actual men and women in these groups?

And yes, I'm aware that the historical GD, for example, was built largely on the foundation layed by its female leaders and members, and I'm sure that there are magical orders that follow that pattern today (I'd love to hear specific examples, if someone can offer them). But in exoteric forums (i.e. "outside the lodge"), do the founding women of the GD currently have the level of name-recognition among young occultists (male and female) that the founding men do? This may change in time, thanks to the efforts of Mary Greer and Christina Oakley, et. al., but for now it remains a live issue.

Celane made the point above about the biased perception of gender-neutral figures in different occult areas, and I think that, as magicians, we ought to take a professional interest in what perceptions (and assumptions) we choose to reinforce and which we choose to challenge.
 
 
Quantum
14:03 / 03.10.05
First, the Tarot thing is ridiculous and irrelevant: that's like saying that women dominate the advertising industry

Au contraire. I was talking about the authors of the best books on the Tarot, Rachel Pollack, Mary Greer, Janina Renee etc. women (or TG) who are producing the best and most respected (and bought) works in the field. I'm not saying that they're on the covers of the books in bikinis, that they wrote the books. So I'd say it's relevant.

I think the sexism in the occult is largely out of date, but since people refer to older work much more than in other fields it seems more prevalent. Just because the GD was sexist doesn't mean women are being excluded today.

Just to make it clear, I think women are under-represented in the published canon of the occult, and that's scandalous (like Pamela Coleman-Smith's deck getting called the Rider-Waite) but that it's due to the prevalence of sexism in the past. Check a list of recently published works and you'll find a lot (majority?) of female authors, good and bad.

The "New Age industry," for better or worse, is pretty soundly denigrated (or at least ignored) by "The Serious Magickers,"
So are you saying that women are under-represented in the elitist section of the occult? Hmm, why might that be I wonder? Due to the elitism?
I'm finding it hard not to infer from your post that you're implying that there's a vast repository of new age wimmin who we can discount, and there should be more women represented in, well, Gen Hex. Please excuse my slightly snippy response, I do realise there are patriarchal power structures in place throughout society including the occult, but looking at my bookshelf I find most of the more recent books are by women.

IMHO there's plenty of gifted women making their mark in the occult community. Gurlpower. ;]
 
 
Chiropteran
14:36 / 03.10.05
Quantum: Okay, I see where I misread your post about the Tarot - it sounded to me like you were talking about The Empress, the High Priestess, etc. (y'know, "Women In the Tarot"), so of course I thought it was ludicrous. In my defense (erm), I read your post very late last night and stewed about it until I responded in the morning, so I missed what is, in hindsight, the most obvious reading. Sorry about that.

I'm finding it hard not to infer from your post that you're implying that there's a vast repository of new age wimmin who we can discount

No, I'm implying that this "vast repository of new age wimmin" often is discounted by the, yes, elitist sections of the occult - not that they should be. Authors (female and male) who work and publish under the New Age marketing umbrella do seem to be seen by many occultists as "something else" other than serious occultism. Am I being uncharitable to "many occultists?"

As for your library of recent occult books by female authors, perhaps I'm the one who's behind the times, then (in company with Disinfo?). Maybe this has all moved ahead without me and I'm ranting about nothing. Can someone catch me up then, with specifics? I'm not being snarky, I really would like to be disabused of this notion, if it really is outdated.

Meanwhile, if it is the case that female occultists are really making their mark on the scene right now, then that only reinforces my impression that Gen Hex is less than representative. Why might this be? And does it matter?
 
 
Unconditional Love
15:15 / 03.10.05
basically occultism is very sexist, and seems to tag along with priesthood ideas of old, the high powerful bearded patriarch and his followers. its a bag of shite really. same as university used to have with its hierachy of male lecturers.

Its changing, needs to change alot quicker. id like to see alot more even spread of women and ethnicity in occultism. it seems to be happening within the church and other faiths, you can only hope that it isnt tokenism, or even if it is that it eventually becomes what its intended to be, a more equal representation of the community as a whole.
 
 
Imaginary Mongoose Solutions
16:06 / 03.10.05
I wonder if perhaps part of the issue here is that a lot of terms are being thrown loosely and interchangably? I mean, many Wiccans I know don't consider themselves part of "the occult", they consider themselves part of an active and valid alternative religion... no different from say Hinduisim. (Note: I make no judgements on the validity of that perspective.)

When we say, "the occult" what are we talking about here? Are we talking strictly Western Tradition/Thelemic/Hermetic stuff? Most of which carries it's own solar/phallic baggage that probably makes it uninviting to many man and women who don't buy into elaborate heirachies and the like?

I'm not saying the new age/occult/whatever movement might not have some gender bias... there's gender bias in every level of our society. (I know the last OTO meeting I went to was a sausage party.) What I'm saying is that perhaps we can get a clearer view of the issue by defining the playing field better.

(And perhaps my own bias is showing in that I grow weary of 'the occult'. Fuck that Occult shit, I'm hiding fuck all.)
 
 
trouser the trouserian
16:24 / 03.10.05
Just because the GD was sexist doesn't mean women are being excluded today.

Sigh. Given that women held senior positions in the G.D. throughout its turbulent history (Florence Farr for example, headed the GD for several years and wrote much of its teaching material) - and that many of the surviving splinter lodges were also headed by women, I don't know quite where you're coming from Quantum, with this comment. If anything, it's contemporary post-G.D. publishing that's tended to prioritise its male members (no pun intended). Similarly, very little is known of the women associated with Crowley, such as Lady Freida Harris or Leah Hirsig (and perhaps more intrguingly, Leah's sister, Alma, who was an initiate of Pierre Bernard's "Tantrik Order").

It's tempting to think that "the past" was sexist but everything's groovy now. I think it's a bit more complex than that.
 
 
*
16:34 / 03.10.05
(threadrot) Quantum, in the future could you say "women, some of them transgender" rather than "women (or TG)" as if the two are somehow mutually exclusive? I'd appreciate that more accurate and respectful language. (/threadrot)

This thread is really interesting, and I promise to add something of greater substance later.
 
 
gale
16:55 / 03.10.05
Perhaps we should differentiate between Wiccan and witch. Wicca is a religion and witchcraft is a practice. A Wiccan may be a witch, but doesn't have to be to practice hir faith.

I also thought the women in tarot comment was referring to the cards themselves. Along that line, I will add that theThoth deck was painted by lady Frieda Harris.

I think that occult (I'm using that term because it is the only one I can think of that can encompass everybody's practice) groups vary in their percentages of men or women members. Ceremonial magic may be male-oriented the way it's written (or WAS written), but not necessarily the way it's practiced. I've never been to a meeting of ceremonial magic types, but from what I've read in group ads, everybody is welcome.

However, whever I go to my local game store, I am always--without exception--the only female there. And I only go there to buy graphic novels! But when I actually sat down and talked to some of the regulars, they weren't patronizing or standoffish.

So is there really a sexual divide? Are there that few women in Barbelith's temple?
 
 
beautifultoxin
17:36 / 03.10.05
Here's a few facilitator type suggestions, to keep this ball rolling --

1. Some speakers are going at the numbers game -- i.e., let's count how many women are here vs. men, and come to a conclusion around sexism/patriarchy based on these 'objective' figures. I propose that this is about as useful as the "but some of my good friends are black/queer/trans!" tack that can just be a dodge when the "institutional oppression!" card is on the table. This isn't about bean counting. That's called tokenism.

2. Let's say it again: "institutional sexism".

3. To polarize this conversation back into male/female, or to imply that there's only two genders afoot here, is sexist itself. When you type male, do you mean "non-transgendered male"? When you type "women," do you mean to include transwomen and the experiences of others who were not raised male in this culture? Just sayin'.
 
 
beautifultoxin
17:45 / 03.10.05
Also, on witch/wiccan -- personally, I identify as a witch, and not a wiccan. What I do has little to do with Gerald Gardner c. 1940's and the related, but then again, that's also true for most wiccans.

Most wiccans and witches overlap when it comes to making community -- which I mean to include gatherings, trainings, businesses, interfaith work, households, etc. -- so for our purposes, it doesn't really give the conversation more clarity for me. It may for others, but I'm looking at interpersonal/institutional forces here. Also, with more and more CM/TWO (traditional western occultists) comingling with pagan/neopagan/wiccan/witch communities, it may be worth it to be a little intentionally hazy about boundaries for the sake of reflecting where community dynamics are headed.


(threadrot -- why does the identity stuff remind me of early 00's electronic music fliers? "jungle wicca trancecraft in the front, chill chaos and occult grooves in the back..." and I'm just a jaded urban witch who'd rather keep to herself most of the time, else sound a fool staking territory in public -- "No, not junglecraft, d&bcraft...! Honestly!")
 
 
Unconditional Love
18:19 / 03.10.05
"It's tempting to think that "the past" was sexist but everything's groovy now. I think it's a bit more complex than that."

Can you explain how those interactions complicate the process of social identification by magickal practitioners
and where these historical relationships may take gender issues within the magickal community in the future, please.
 
 
Quantum
11:03 / 04.10.05
Given that women held senior positions in the G.D. throughout its turbulent history ...

Why aren't they more recognised now? Why weren't they more recognised then? In terms of the literature produced especially (rather than their position or influence) the GD women were under-represented, surely.
I thought this was a reflection of the society at the time rather than on the GD specifically (who were pretty progressive IIRC) but I think it's fair to say Crowley and Mathers are more famous than Harris or Coleman-Smith. That's what I meant, not that the GD were misogynist patriarchs.
 
 
trouser the trouserian
14:58 / 04.10.05
Qauntum. "Now" and "then" are two seperate issues. As to why they're not "recognised" now? I dunno. It's entirely possible that they are best-known from their "other" activities and that orthodox biographers have not focused on their involvement with the GD overmuch. Anna Kingsford, for example, who founded the Hermetic Society (a direct precursor of the G.D.) is probably better known for her pioneering activism as a feminist and anti-vivisectionist. (Crowley refers to her in glowing terms in his introduction to Book Four). Maud Gonne is possibly better known for her association with Irish radical politics (she is sometimes said to be one of the founders of Sinn Fein) and her affair with YB Yeats than her involvement with the GD. Little is known of Moina Mathers - Ithell Colquhoun's Sword of Wisdom gives some insights into her. Dion Fortune is rather biased against her (there are some veiled 'digs' at Moina in Psychic Self-Defence for example) as it was Fortune's 'magical differences' with Moina that got Fortune turfed out of the GD. Similarly, as far as I can make out, there has been little attention paid to Constance Wilde (Richard Ellman's biography of Oscar merely notes in passing that Constance had "seperate interests" to Oscar, and leaves it at that).

There has been some interesting research on Annie Besant - again, not so much in terms of her being a Theosophist, but mainly due to her political involvement (Irish home rule, Indian independence, birth control, and women's emancipation):

Many women now, educated more highly than they used to be -- women with strong brains and loving hearts -- are being driven into bitterness and into angry opposition, because their ambition is thwarted at every step, and their eager longing for a fuller life are forced back and crushed. A tree will grow, however you may try to stunt it. You may disfigure it, you may force it into awkward shapes, but grow it will.
(Annie Besant, The Political Status of Women, 1874)

(see Annie Besant - an Overview)

There is is still a good deal of research to be done - all that's required is for some enterprising person to step forwards and do it. No mean task, though. Back in the mid-80's, for example, I was given a set of xeroxes of Leah Hirsig's magical diaries that had been (ahem) 'extracted' from the Gerald Yorke collection. I found them fascinating, and transcribed them into ascii with a view to having them published. However, this was not enough - they required (I felt at the time) annotating and commenting by someone who knew enough about the personages she referred to, in order to do them justice. I passed the originals and the disks to a friend who at the time was running Revelations 23 Press (one of TOPY's UK publishing arms) who included them in a TOPY collection entitled A Taste of things to Come. I heard shortly afterwards that the ms had been forwarded to a researcher, but thus far, nothing has emerged.

As to being recognised then Here's where a knowledge of the period helps - Florence Farr, for example, wrote a good many articles for the occult journals of the period. If you care to dig around, you'll find that many prominent women magicians were certainly recognised by their peer communities - in terms of getting published in journals and so forth. That Florence Farr was able to publish books on magic (Enochian & Egyptian Magic being 2 of the subjects) is hopefully an indication of her influence.

It has been suggested to me (on more than one occasion) that RA Gilbert (who's widely thought of as the most authoratitive occult historian of the Golden Dawn) has a "blind spot" when it comes to the contributions of its female members. Sadly, I'd have to say that these women were probably more famous for their "occult achievements" then (ie in their own period) than they are now.
 
 
Unconditional Love
21:16 / 04.10.05
What about comparing the lives of the women of the golden dawn, thelema and wicca with practitioners today, say examining the nemas life in comparison to Leah Hirsig's, how social ramifications have changed(if they have) and how there experiences draw similarities and differ.

Perhaps relating these figures to current practitioners would highlight there achievements, and how developement has taken place within magickal orders regarding gender.
 
 
Quantum
10:10 / 05.10.05
Thanks for that post Trouserian- it certainly does help to have a knowledge of the period. I think it is better now than then though, whilst still far from perfect you must admit there has been *some* improvement in equality.

Excellent quote from a woman of the time-

Josephine Butler said that the conspiracy of silence of the press had forced women to create a literature of their own (from the Besant & Transgression article, linked in Trousers post above)

Is it perhaps the publishing business which causes the under-representation of women in occult literature rather than occultism itself?
I wonder if sexism is more prevalent in magic than in other fields, or less?
 
 
Boy in a Suitcase
14:09 / 05.10.05
Is it perhaps the publishing business which causes the under-representation of women in occult literature rather than occultism itself?

OK. Before anybody goes dragging Generation Hex into this again:

I set out trying to have a completely gender-balanced, or even female-majority book. I wanted to include people from as many people from as many different walks of life as possible. This was my intent from the beginning and I struggled to meet it. However, the people who submitted to the book just did NOT come through on that front.

Remember, I had a call for submissions up for approaching TWO YEARS.

Very few women contributed submissions to the book. There were several women who had very interesting ideas for articles and I did my best to work with them in developing their ideas. In almost all of their cases interest was lost, intent was not followed through on and my calls were not returned.

Many of the articles that were completed were not of high enough quality to make it into the book, which was constrained to 288 pages.

It was my goal to put together the best book possible in the shortest space possible. If women are underrepresented in the book it is because the material wasn't given to me. Everybody in the Western world was given over TWO YEARS to get it together. Only a very few sufficiently did, were good enough writers to be published, and were good enough magicians to offer something of practical and useful benefit in the lives of the readers of the book—and these people are in the book.

If you don't like it, go do it yourself and quit blaming me for imagined slights. If Generation Hex has any message, it's that EVERYBODY needs to get their shit sorted. So go do it already and stop whining about bias in the publishing industry. Magickal excellence has nothing to do with gender.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
14:26 / 05.10.05
I feel really bad now that I didn't contribute to Gen. Hex. Although I wasn't doing my most interesting work when the request for submissions came out, I could have put something together.

I just sort of assumed there was no point--not that I'd get rejected out of hand for having girl cooties, just that nobody would be interested in what I had to say. It just didn't seem worth the effort when I was so certain that anything I might try to cover would have been amply dealt with by others.

I'm reconsidering that position. Even if I'd entered a piece and had it rejected out of hand, I'd still have increased the overall pool of work that could be drawn on. Bottom line: I had a duty, not a big duty but still a duty, and I blew it.

(I now find myself in a similar position once more, with a practitioner I respect putting together a book on a subject that I'm at least reasonably familiar with and calling for articles. Part of me wants to switch off again and leave it all to the "real" people, but that's not going to happen this time...)
 
 
grant
15:10 / 05.10.05
If you want a proofer, I'm into it.
 
 
trouser the trouserian
15:27 / 05.10.05
This might be of interest The Kali Circle

THEE KALI CIRCLE is a forum within the TOPY network with a focus on the female experience and feminine magick. The inspiration was initially to address an imbalance, where the opinions and experiences of males seemed to dominate TOPY's activities and publications. The first emanation was a booklet published by TOPY Heart called "Thee Kali Circle". The second volume was released years later by TOPY NA. This compendium brings together both volumes for the first time ever.
 
 
*
16:09 / 05.10.05
I'm sorry you feel this entire thread is directed at you personally, Jason. So far as I'm aware, that wasn't the intent. That said, social analysis != whining. Could you make an effort to take this less personally? That way maybe we can constructively explore such topics as why you might have gotten so few contributions from women, why so many of the contributions from women fell through, etc.
 
 
Boy in a Suitcase
16:24 / 05.10.05
Constructively explore away. I just wanted to make it very very clear WHY there are so few women in Gen Hex. Carry on...
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
18:42 / 05.10.05
Well, I'm sorry if BiaS took the thread to heart but I'm also glad of the information in his post. It is useful to know that, as was theorised elsewhere, far more men than women submitted work to the project overall; and that while women were coming up with good ideas, they weren't following though in terms of producing articles. Why might this be? I'm wondering how many other female practitioners thought "Oooh, I should send something in to that," then looked at the topics they might cover in relation to their own work and thought "Meh. Been done/someone else'll do it/not out-there enough/too hedge-witchy," or whatever.
 
 
*
20:01 / 05.10.05
Not that I'm a woman, but I was raised as one— and when I was thinking about writing something for Gen Hex I just concluded I didn't have anything worthwhile to say, myself.
 
  

Page: (1)23

 
  
Add Your Reply