From: cortese@skid.ps.uci.edu (Janis Maria Cortese)
Subject: Re: names
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Date: 12 Sep 92 01:38:27 GMT

In article <1992Sep12.004024.7743@csus.edu> altheimm@nextnet.csus.edu (Murray Altheim) writes:
>In article <2AB10788.20455@news.service.uci.edu> cortese@skid.ps.uci.edu (Janis Maria Cortese) writes:
>>This subject is interesting to me; I suppose ny own name has pretty much
>>snuck up and attached itself to me, even though I don't "use" it in any
>>real sense.  I'm a Solitary, so no one else knows what it is, although
>>people I'm close to can probably guess if they think about it.
>
>[...]
>
>>If I were to "take" a coven name (if I were to join a coven), this would
>>be it, but I would still feel strange about telling people what it was.
>>The depth of the process by which this name found me is simply too much
>>to describe.  I could only shrug my shoulders.
>>
>>Oh, well.  I just thought I add my own sqt4 cents to this thing.
>>
>>Blessings,
>>Janis
>
>Janis,
>
>Just to add _my_ own squirt-4 cents to this, I've noticed the number of those
>who post on this and other groups who go by an alias. Now, theoretically,
>you and I and bill and others could ALL be going by an alias, but a few
>things occur to me I thought I'd bring up.
>
>First of all, going by an alias seems to be to imply a fear of retribution
>in some cases, in others the desire to take on a persona other than one's
>own. There are certainly other reasons, and some may be justified. As a few
>people have stated, they have been victims of discrimination or worse, based
>on their pagan views. Just being associated with a newsgroup named alt.pagan
>could be dangerous to some people under certain circumstances. I can respect
>that.

Agreed. 

>In other cases, it seems to be a whim; a desire to be treated differently 
>than one's true person is treated. I know a FEW people who "defined" them-
>selves through involvement in the SCA, the military, the church, etc. and
>then went on to incorporate elements from their defined selves into their
>own life as time went on. They became to some measure the person they were
>trying to embody. Is this legitimate? I'm not the one to decide.

I've certainly incorporated elements from this stuff into myself.  I
incorporate elements of everything I encounter into myself.  However, I
agree that there is a difference between finding a good name and playing
let's pretend.  HOWever, as to whether or not any given person is doing
it, I can't say.  I can make predictions on the behavior of large
numbers of people -- I can't predict any one of them.  

>I will say, that as a fierce individualist, I respect those willing to step
>outside the norm and live on that razor's edge between insanity and 
>enlightenment. Few people set their goals that high (unfortunately), and 
>I find it difficult to take somebody seriously who calls themself "Zeus"
>or "Cleopatra". It's sometimes hard not to snigger, even given my above
>stated understanding of the possible reasons for taking on such a moniker.

Sometimes, when it's done in what appears to be a pretentious manner, it
sounds like someone playing dress-up, and as soon as they get tired of
that name, they'll take something else that sounds pretty and fluffy.
This bothers me, too, but I guess if someone wants to be called Lady
Moonbeam or whatever, I can't stop `em.  Besides, there are too many of
them who know what they're talking about. ;-) 

This is, however, a reason why I don't use my other name AT ALL.  It has
meaning only inside my head, since other people cannot know the full
extent of the "properness" of that "proper" name, as an inherent name.
I don't want it to sound like it's some kind of dress-up mask, that I
don't like myself and am trying to take on someone else's persona.  No
matter how hard I try, and how sincere someone may be, I still have a
knee-jerk reaction to someone called Lady So-and-So, that she (she
because I'm talking about myself) has taken the name to impress the
peons, or because she wants some fluffy, cute name.  It's judgemental,
I guess, but it still comes to mind.  Kind of like all the grandmothers
who are floating around in some areas of magic-oriented Paganism.  

However, it is a nice shorthand for oneself, especially when you keep
your spirituality separate from your job -- or are forced to do so. 
It seems like a nice way to get into the mood for ritual -- to think of
yourself in a special way, right down to your name.  I am not forced to
keep my spirituality separate from my work (such as it is), so I can
cart it around when I want, and that may explain part of why I don't
feel the need to use the other name (in fact, I feel a positive
antipathy toward even letting anyone else know what it is). 
 
Also, as far as taken names in Paganism go in Paganism, mine is rather
common, and I don't want to be known as the Pagan equivalent of John
Smith.     

>(Any Cleopatras or Zeuses out there, this wasn't meant to refer to you, but
>the Cleopatras and Zeuses in general. Standard disclaimers apply.)

In my case as well.  However, I may have it easier since "Janis" has a
*ahem* novel provenance.  (It's a degenerate form of "vulva," from the
word for "gate.")   

>It's a lot easier to picture someone on the other end named Bill, than 
>Zeus. How about making a name up from scratch? Skudboll? Wylie Worm? I 
>dunno, it just seems there is a real difference between aiming high by
>emulating someone or something containing an essential, desirable quality,
>and attaching the name of a god. I'm not talking blasphemy or anything so
>extreme, just the same common sense you'd find meeting somebody at a party.
>
>If I was introduced at at party to some Woody Allen lookalike named Zeus,
>I'd have to stifle myself.
>
>So I suppose all I'm saying is that if you choose a name for use on this 
>network, I for one may not take you as seriously as one willing to state a
>name I could take seriously.

It's difficult to say, though.  Is it my fault (or yours) for having an
inability to take someone seriously?  How much of it is our inability to go
beyond things like this?

I ask these questions because they are bound to be asked, and they are
vaild.  *HOW*ever, I still have problems with the flowery names as well.
As far as they go -- designating one as being part of an emotionally
important group -- they do their job well.  But, there is still an
EEENSY little part of me that wants to ask, "No, what's your REAL name?"
Now, of course, real is what you make of it.

Still . . . I agree about having a hard time relating to someone named
"Zeus."  It still sounds like dress-up, lets-all-give-ourselves-pretty
-names.  Sorry to anyone who's offended -- I'm just telling it like I
feel.  I DO have this problem; it's my problem, true, but I can still
talk about it.  Like I said, I may feel like this about large groups of
people with flowery pseudonyms, but I am not about to judge anyone
individually because of it.  I try to go into every new encounter with
people with no prejudgements (try, of course).    

>And BTW, this wasn't meant as an attack on anybody, just some random thoughts
>on a Friday afternoon...

Most agreed. 

>Murray with the Ungodlike Name*

Oh, hell.  It means YOU doesn't it?  If we are, in fact, our own gods and
goddesses, then it's a godlike name.  

Blessings,
Janis the Vulva 

>* BTW, anyone knowing of any gods named Murray, please let me know so I
>can strut around. Of course, with my luck, it will be "Murray, God of 
>Polyester Suits, Flavored Doritos, and Used Car Salesmen". :P

You forgot Ultrasuede. 

Newsgroups: alt.pagan