Question.

[Katsumi Aki]

Since there is such a problem with the continuing increase in people who are misinformed about what Wicca truly is, how come more actual Wiccans don't try to get the truth out there. The reason why people think that what they are reading in the books they buy is real. Why should they think any different? It's not like the correct information is really out there in the open. How are people to know if no ones fighting to get the truth out? You'd think by now a couple of true initiated lineaged Wiccans would have published books on Wicca, explaining what Wicca truly is without breaking their oaths.

Also, I have a suggestion. Since there are a lot of the not-really Wiccans that visit the guild, I think there should be a sticky thread in this forum titled "Before you Claim to be Wiccan, Read This." Then explain what is Wicca and what's not. Think about how many times people here have already explained Wicca in individual threads, it might save a little time. Sure, I bet there will still be a couple of stubborn people, but it can still help those who are just misinformed, but will actually accept it.

 

[Sanguina Cruenta]

There are a few books out on Wicca. Those by Gardner, for example. There's also the Farrars, Patricia Crowther.... damn, who has Scorplett's reading list?? Just the Wicca section...

Many of them, admittedly, are out of date in that they tend to use the words "Wicca" and "witchcraft" interchangeably, and they tend to have been written before Murray's theories were totally rejected, so they'll go on about those as well. On the other hand, most of them are written by people pretty close to Gardner, initiation-wise.

I personally agree that something new should be written, simply because it rather undermine's a book's credibility when you say "this book contains good, proper info about Wicca. But this part here and this part here are utter c**k".

Good books are harder to get your hands on (because of publishers and retailers), are often more expensive, and are drier and "harder to read". Cunningham would sell more.  

[Esselean]

Katsumi Aki

Also, I have a suggestion. Since there are a lot of the not-really Wiccans that visit the guild, I think there should be a sticky thread in this forum titled "Before you Claim to be Wiccan, Read This." Then explain what is Wicca and what's not. Think about how many times people here have already explained Wicca in individual threads, it might save a little time. Sure, I bet there will still be a couple of stubborn people, but it can still help those who are just misinformed, but will actually accept it.

It's all written on the guild home page. If people don't read the front page of the guild why would they read a stickied topic?  

[Katsumi Aki]

Esselean

Katsumi Aki

Also, I have a suggestion. Since there are a lot of the not-really Wiccans that visit the guild, I think there should be a sticky thread in this forum titled "Before you Claim to be Wiccan, Read This." Then explain what is Wicca and what's not. Think about how many times people here have already explained Wicca in individual threads, it might save a little time. Sure, I bet there will still be a couple of stubborn people, but it can still help those who are just misinformed, but will actually accept it.

It's all written on the guild home page. If people don't read the front page of the guild why would they read a stickied topic?

Like I said, it beats people repeating themselves in every thread the topic comes up. People can just post the link to anyone still claiming to be Wiccan, so they can go read it there instead of typing out the whole thing every time.

 

[kage no neko]

I've seen in forums people posting new threads just because they can't be bothered to read the ONE page of threads that already exist to talk in a pre-existing thread on that topic.
I've also seen people just go and click and not even pay attention to what forum they're talking in. Talking in the ED when they think they've clicked the GD or the LD.

I can't imagine it'd be much different in a guild.  

[Starlock]

Katsumi Aki

Since there is such a problem with the continuing increase in people who are misinformed about what Wicca truly is, how come more actual Wiccans don't try to get the truth out there.

*slaps face with hand*

Possibly because the "truth" is not what these "enlightened" people think it is and that their viewpoint is actually an opinion, not the objective truth they like to claim it is (aka, there is not actually a problem).

Or that "actual Wiccans" have better things to do with their time than put down progressive Wiccans since the mainstream has already accepted the use of the word "Wicca" in a broader context (and by "the mainstream," I mean the Neopagan community, the general public, AND academic scholars).

Misinformed my a**. Sorry, I'm not usually this blunt with it, but seriously. This isn't the 1960s. It's 2009. Attempting to turn back the clock to the 1960s isn't doing anyone any good. I'd argue it's creating an equally misinformed conception of what Wicca is. I suspect the Neopagan scholar I've spoken with on the subject would agree, and frankly, I'll take her word over the word of a bunch of non-authoritative strangers on a web forum any day of the week.

No personal offense intended; some of you guys are smart and you do know a thing or two about research, but you're not academic researchers and you're not authorities on the subject. Neither am I. But I'd be a fool to trust the words of someone on a web forum over Ph.D.'s who have spent decades studying Neopaganism on an issue like this. Or even Wikipedia, to be honest, since at least that has many contributers and is, in principle, more impartial than the "Wicca FAQ" in M&R.

Go on. Call me a fluffy bunny. I know some of you are just dying to; you've even redefined the term to mean "willful ignorance" just so you can slam people like me who disagree with your version of truth! Do it! Doooo it! mrgreen (this part is all in good humor, so please don't take offense; I don't believe you guys are really intending to be so nefarious. Nevertheless, it is how you guys can comes across to the rest of us: on the same level as the fundamentalist Christian who screams "there is only one truuuuuth and you are all unenlightened fooooools!" No surprise that many people tune you out when come off like that, eh?

By the way, the moment one of you non-authoritative pseudo-academics out there actually submits this strangely dated definition of Wicca to peer review (and I mean academic peer review like the Pomegranate) and gets it published is the moment I'll genuinely start taking you seriously. Until then, you're a bunch of kids and young adults on a web forum that have some very interesting ideas, but that I cannot in good conscience take as authoritative no matter how well you put together your argument (especially when virtually everything else I consult says you're full of it, no offense). Academic peer review: the ultimate (although not fullproof) bull s**t litmus test. xd

Until one of you picks up that gauntlet, I'm sticking with teaching distinctions between BTW and mainstream Wicca, not serving people your ultimatum.  

[kage no neko]

Except.. I know quite a few adults (30+) on here. So it's not just kids and young adults. ninja

I try to teach people what Wicca is supposed to be, not what the books are using it for.  

[Violet Song jat Shariff]

Starlock

*slaps face with hand*

No no no, allow me.

Quote:

Possibly because the "truth" is not what these "enlightened" people think it is and that their viewpoint is actually an opinion, not the objective truth they like to claim it is (aka, there is not actually a problem).

I'm sorry but I fail to see where you have ever ******** brought any other evidence of Wicca outside of Gardner to this same old table that you supposedly are tired of visiting. Put up or shut up.

Quote:

Or that "actual Wiccans" have better things to do with their time than put down progressive Wiccans since the mainstream has already accepted the use of the word "Wicca" in a broader context (and by "the mainstream," I mean the Neopagan community, the general public, AND academic scholars).

I'll let Morgandria answer this as she is one of the "actual Wiccans." *GASP*
And I honestly don't give a flying ******** what mainstream society has to say. Mainstream society tells me I should be married and pregnant by now and about 60k in debt. Mainstream society also says that girls over size 6-8 are "fat." A few years back as well, mainstream society also said the world was flat.
Now, do we want to keep listening to "mainstream society"? Mainstream society isn't always right. I don't care if it cuddles up nicely with your bullshit opinion.

Quote:

Misinformed my a**.

I'm sorry, but I think more than just your a** is misinformed.

Quote:

Sorry, I'm not usually this blunt with it, but seriously.

I know; I'm waiting for you to be serious.
I suppose I'll wait a good long time.

Quote:

This isn't the 1960s. It's 2009.

So? You have a calendar and can read numbers. Good for you.

Quote:

Attempting to turn back the clock to the 1960s isn't doing anyone any good.

Who said we're trying to turn back the clock?
I'm sure you'd be VERY surprised to know that in the 60s, there was little to no distinction between the words Wiccan, witch, and Pagan. And I certainly don't see ANYONE here arguing that we should make all of those terms ambiguous again.

Quote:

I'd argue it's creating an equally misinformed conception of what Wicca is.

You could argue that, but you'd look pretty silly.
Explain to me how it's creating a "misinformed" conception of what Wicca is as it was explained by the religion's creator and as such passed on to other initiates? Go on, I have a few days off and eagerly await your answer.

Quote:

I suspect the Neopagan scholar I've spoken with on the subject would agree, and frankly, I'll take her word over the word of a bunch of non-authoritative strangers on a web forum any day of the week.

Which Neo-pagan author would this be? What authority does she have on Wicca?

Quote:

No personal offense intended;

You know, when people say this, this usually means that they have indeed said something personally offending. On purpose. If you didn't mean personal offense, they why the ******** don't you just press your backspace key?
Oh right; because if you use your backspace key, you can't look like you're taking the highroad!

Quote:

some of you guys are smart and you do know a thing or two about research, but you're not academic researchers and you're not authorities on the subject. Neither am I.

Right, so none of us are academic researchers, but people should take your word over other non-acadmeic researchers?
Also, please point out where any of us have said "Yea we're academic researchers!" For anyone to take us as academic researchers at face value is their problem, not ours.

Quote:

But I'd be a fool to trust the words of someone on a web forum over Ph.D.'s who have spent decades studying Neopaganism on an issue like this.

Hear that Morgandria? Your initiation and exposure to the Mysteries just doesn't cut it against a Ph.D who has studied Wicca from the ******** outside! Yes, because clearly someone is able to ascertain more about a mystery-based tradition and its said mysteries from the outside than one would from the inside.

Quote:

Or even Wikipedia, to be honest, since at least that has many contributers and is, in principle, more impartial than the "Wicca FAQ" in M&R.

Really? So ignoring BTW in favor of "rape-as-you-go" Wicca is "impartial"?
I'm sorry, but did you just randomly switch to Swahili in the middle of that thought? Because that made no ******** sense in English.

Quote:

Go on. Call me a fluffy bunny.

Why?

Quote:

I know some of you are just dying to; you've even redefined the term to mean "willful ignorance" just so you can slam people like me who disagree with your version of truth!

Fluffy bunny does refer to one who is willfully ignorant confused

Quote:

Do it! Doooo it! mrgreen (this part is all in good humor, so please don't take offense; I don't believe you guys are really intending to be so nefarious.

As guild crew, I will have to warn you that baiting other users to flame is against ToS and therefore not acceptable conduct in this guild.

Quote:

Nevertheless, it is how you guys can comes across to the rest of us: on the same level as the fundamentalist Christian who screams "there is only one truuuuuth and you are all unenlightened fooooools!"

Oh look; another Pagan making another cheap insult at Christianity's cost. I wonder what the vouge insult will be next season?
Wicca is orthopraxic; there is a correct way to practice it and if you do not follow said practice, then you are doing things wrong and ergo it is not properly Wicca.

Quote:

No surprise that many people tune you out when come off like that, eh?

Oh you're so totally right! I've never actually informed ANYONE about Wicca vs. the misinformation! Not a one.

Quote:

By the way, the moment one of you non-authoritative pseudo-academics out there actually submits this strangely dated definition of Wicca to peer review (and I mean academic peer review like the Pomegranate) and gets it published is the moment I'll genuinely start taking you seriously.

Wow that was some impressive goal-post moving! When did you get all those muscles?
I don't give a s**t if you take me or any of the other "pseudo-intellectuals" seriously.

Quote:

Until then, you're a bunch of kids and young adults on a web forum that have some very interesting ideas, but that I cannot in good conscience take as authoritative no matter how well you put together your argument (especially when virtually everything else I consult says you're full of it, no offense).

I"m probably the same age you are stare . And I'm not a young adult by any means.
Funny thing is, I can consult a s**t-ton of other sources that says you're full of it! Guess that means I win after all blaugh . Thanks for playing, don't let the door hit you in the a** on the way out. It's a b***h to keep polished.

Quote:

Academic peer review: the ultimate (although not fullproof) bull s**t litmus test. xd

Really? So what academic-peer reviews have you gotten passed on your epic research on Neo-paganism? If you're going to hold the bar to us, then we'll sure as ******** hold it to you.

Guess you'd better go crack those books!

Quote:

Until one of you picks up that gauntlet, I'm sticking with teaching distinctions between BTW and mainstream Wicca, not serving people your ultimatum.

Don't give me that s**t; this whole post smacks of being bait.
Are you finally evolving your online career from a bunny to a troll?  

[Sanguina Cruenta]

Funny thing.

A book on Neo-Pagan witchcrafts I read in the university library spoke at length about how Wicca is only accessible through initiation. In fact, the anthropologist and religious scholar in question was initiated into a Gardnerian coven in order to actually understand it before she could write about it (without breaking her oaths, no less). She went into her reasons for doing so in wide detail, as well as her reasons for submersing herself in the participation of the religion rather than simply, as someone else had, going through the motions, as she felt she couldn't understand the religion if she kept herself absolutely separate.

It was fascinating.

The book was called "Witching Culture" by Sabina Magliocco, and published by the University of Pensylvannia. She specialises in religious anthropology and iirc she was particularly interested in ritual and how it affects the individual. It is a recent text aimed at the academic.

I await your rebuttal text.  

[Orchidsandfractals]

Starlock

Katsumi Aki

Since there is such a problem with the continuing increase in people who are misinformed about what Wicca truly is, how come more actual Wiccans don't try to get the truth out there.

*slaps face with hand*

Possibly because the "truth" is not what these "enlightened" people think it is and that their viewpoint is actually an opinion, not the objective truth they like to claim it is (aka, there is not actually a problem).

Or that "actual Wiccans" have better things to do with their time than put down progressive Wiccans since the mainstream has already accepted the use of the word "Wicca" in a broader context (and by "the mainstream," I mean the Neopagan community, the general public, AND academic scholars).

Misinformed my a**. Sorry, I'm not usually this blunt with it, but seriously. This isn't the 1960s. It's 2009. Attempting to turn back the clock to the 1960s isn't doing anyone any good. I'd argue it's creating an equally misinformed conception of what Wicca is. I suspect the Neopagan scholar I've spoken with on the subject would agree, and frankly, I'll take her word over the word of a bunch of non-authoritative strangers on a web forum any day of the week.

No personal offense intended; some of you guys are smart and you do know a thing or two about research, but you're not academic researchers and you're not authorities on the subject. Neither am I. But I'd be a fool to trust the words of someone on a web forum over Ph.D.'s who have spent decades studying Neopaganism on an issue like this. Or even Wikipedia, to be honest, since at least that has many contributers and is, in principle, more impartial than the "Wicca FAQ" in M&R.

Go on. Call me a fluffy bunny. I know some of you are just dying to; you've even redefined the term to mean "willful ignorance" just so you can slam people like me who disagree with your version of truth! Do it! Doooo it! mrgreen (this part is all in good humor, so please don't take offense; I don't believe you guys are really intending to be so nefarious. Nevertheless, it is how you guys can comes across to the rest of us: on the same level as the fundamentalist Christian who screams "there is only one truuuuuth and you are all unenlightened fooooools!" No surprise that many people tune you out when come off like that, eh?

By the way, the moment one of you non-authoritative pseudo-academics out there actually submits this strangely dated definition of Wicca to peer review (and I mean academic peer review like the Pomegranate) and gets it published is the moment I'll genuinely start taking you seriously. Until then, you're a bunch of kids and young adults on a web forum that have some very interesting ideas, but that I cannot in good conscience take as authoritative no matter how well you put together your argument (especially when virtually everything else I consult says you're full of it, no offense). Academic peer review: the ultimate (although not fullproof) bull s**t litmus test. xd

Until one of you picks up that gauntlet, I'm sticking with teaching distinctions between BTW and mainstream Wicca, not serving people your ultimatum.

I agree with you totally, though I do personally think people need to be very clear to specify and respect that BTW and such were the "Original" Wicca(Just my opinion though), and try to be careful to use other terms to describe their religion if it's applicable or more helpful. The other types of religions that are not traditional Wicca are considered Wicca by the mainstream population, and even some types by neopagans(Though, most neopagans I know personally do think just straight Wicca should be reserved for Garderian, which is where I get that idea from.). If there's no better term or the term had been used for quite a while, then it's silly to force an established religion to change their name, though it is a respectful gesture on the practice on the established religion to clarify about different types of Wicca. So props to you for sticking up against what a lot of people seem so upset by online, but that I have yet to see IRL.(Though,some neopagans(not sure if they're Wiccans in any sense of the word.), I have met have said that they'd prefer it if Wicca wasn't used to refer to "teenagers playing Twilight", but I suppose any religion would feel like that. I don't really like the idea of "Hera is a jealous b***h" being my Goddess's portal in the mainstream, or her as a mother by many neopagans, or of Athene and Artemis as "Maiden" goddess, or Hecate as a true triple Goddess.(Hera is more of one) Much less Aphrodite as a Maiden goddess. Some of these misconceptions are tricky to explain, so I do feel Wiccans pain about their religion being used in an inaccurate way. It's nothing to get upset about though really. Explain, if they choose to say "My interpretation of Athene is that she was a sexual Goddess and a Maiden in her life stage, and she didn't like war at ALL, because she was totally just the goddess of people's minds and learning." after all that, then it's their choice and really, you can say, "Yes, but that's not the Traditional interpretation, but it's fine for you to think that, this is what Athene is traditionally seen as, but that doesn't mean you can't see her in a different light!" and everyone will be happy. Sure, it's inaccurate, but if you've explained the traditional meaning and they chose to follow something else and even clarify that it's their opinion, not much else you can do.)

And I do think Gaia can be somewhat useful for broad ideas, but on a different guild, I was called crazy for explaining a pretty clear cut dream about Hera, that one of my friends who is not Hellenistic Pagan but Norse neopagan was easily able to ID, that a Hellenistic forum was easily able to ID, and that was confirmed thru meditation and pendulum divination, and then I was told by my friend that it matched up with the myths(and then I checked on an online forum.), so... I'm pretty sure my dreams are accurate. This guild is a little more accepting, but go figure. I wasn't crazy, and it was pretty clear cut and obvious. That makes me doubt how perfect the advice of Gaians in terms of religion is, but I suppose it's better than nothing, and a lot of the facts do match up at times. People online have shorter tempers than offline it seems.

I do think it's a very good idea for people to be upset at things that defile their religion(Ie, Wiccans worship Satan), but in terms of misuse of a term to describe a safe, harmless religion, I see nothing to be very upset about.

Also, in the 1960s, pagan was used to describe old religions. The Pagan Romans anyone? Neopagan may have only been used to describe Wiccans. Heathen is commonly considered the same as Pagan, and it's not quite perfectly so.  

[Morgandria]

Orchidsandfractals

So props to you for sticking up against what a lot of people seem so upset by online, but that I have yet to see IRL.(Though,some neopagans(not sure if they're Wiccans in any sense of the word.)

You obviously don't have any contact or spend time with Brit Trad Wiccans. Which doesn't surprise me.

Orchidsandfractals

It's nothing to get upset about though really. Explain, if they choose to say "My interpretation of Athene is that she was a sexual Goddess and a Maiden in her life stage, and she didn't like war at ALL, because she was totally just the goddess of people's minds and learning." after all that, then it's their choice and really, you can say, "Yes, but that's not the Traditional interpretation, but it's fine for you to think that, this is what Athene is traditionally seen as, but that doesn't mean you can't see her in a different light!" and everyone will be happy. Sure, it's inaccurate, but if you've explained the traditional meaning and they chose to follow something else and even clarify that it's their opinion, not much else you can do.)

Do me a favour. Don't decide things for me, ok? Because your decisions seem based on opinion, feelings, popularity, convenience and things other than factual information.

Orchidsandfractals

And I do think Gaia can be somewhat useful for broad ideas, but on a different guild, I was called crazy for explaining a pretty clear cut dream about Hera, that one of my friends who is not Hellenistic Pagan but Norse neopagan was easily able to ID, that a Hellenistic forum was easily able to ID, and that was confirmed thru meditation and pendulum divination, and then I was told by my friend that it matched up with the myths(and then I checked on an online forum.), so... I'm pretty sure my dreams are accurate. This guild is a little more accepting, but go figure. I wasn't crazy, and it was pretty clear cut and obvious. That makes me doubt how perfect the advice of Gaians in terms of religion is, but I suppose it's better than nothing, and a lot of the facts do match up at times. People online have shorter tempers than offline it seems.

Whatever. Personally I think you did a pretty slapdash, shallow job of "finding your goddess". The other guild was attempting to get you to think critically, to apply some logic to your methods, to empirically test your experiences and ideas for truth - not to rely on bullshit new-age thinking. It would not have killed you to have taken more time to examine the situation - if it is what it is, you still would be in the same situation as now, only with a firmer basis for your beliefs and practices.

Which brings me to my other observation:
For someone who's only been a deist for a little more than a month...you post as if you've been doing this years, and know everything already. Which comes across as arrogant and smug.
You compound it by posting what is sometimes utter garbage factually.

Take a step back. Listen and read. If you're trying to earn people's respect or convince us that you know your a** from your elbow metaphysically - you're trying too hard. It's working to exactly the opposite end. It's foolish, and you're wearing out your welcome on it.

You have little more than UPG and opinions that you're using as the basis for your religious and spiritual viewpoint. You have been practicing less than a year - less than HALF a year. Do yourself a favour and get some experience under your belt - right now you're attempting to be authoritative on subjects you are not anywhere close to an authority on.

This is as close to a polite response from me as you'll get.  

[Tirissana]

Sanguina Cruenta

Funny thing.

A book on Neo-Pagan witchcrafts I read in the university library spoke at length about how Wicca is only accessible through initiation. In fact, the anthropologist and religious scholar in question was initiated into a Gardnerian coven in order to actually understand it before she could write about it (without breaking her oaths, no less). She went into her reasons for doing so in wide detail, as well as her reasons for submersing herself in the participation of the religion rather than simply, as someone else had, going through the motions, as she felt she couldn't understand the religion if she kept herself absolutely separate.

It was fascinating.

The book was called "Witching Culture" by Sabina Magliocco, and published by the University of Pensylvannia. She specialises in religious anthropology and iirc she was particularly interested in ritual and how it affects the individual. It is a recent text aimed at the academic.

I await your rebuttal text.

San, is it more interesting than Drawing Down the Moon? I read most of the book, including the sections on Wicca, Trad Witchcraft and other things, but couldn't get through the rest. gonk But none the less, I'll add it to my book list. Which needs to be typed out. I'm going to do that tonight before I get immersed in PWI again.

sweatdrop

@OP: While I may not be Wiccan, claim Wiccan or even have any intentions of initating, I do like to study what makes a Wiccan and what it's about. I do try my best to inform and educate people on what Wicca really is out of respect for those who are actual Wiccans like Scorp and Morg. And for those who are Seekers like Vivi.