From: kumagic@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (Stephen R. Figgins)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: Women and Men Witches
Date: 10 Nov 92 23:38:19 CST
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services

In article <1992Nov10.123505.1@fnalno.fnal.gov>, holzman@fnalno.fnal.gov (Daniel B. Holzman) writes:
> In article <1992Nov10.085129.44589@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>, 
> kumagic@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (Stephen R. Figgins) writes:
>
   ...lots-o-stuff deleted...

>> If Anne Wilson Shaeff is correct, in comparing our culutre to the
>> addictive model, then perhaps a twelve step method would be one way to 
>> get out of it.  And first in that is recognizing that we are fucked
>> up, and that the fuckups are beyond our control to repair.
> 
> This still leaves Tim's uqestions unanswered, as far as I can tell.  
> How does admitting that we are fucked up lead to a belief in female 
> supremacy?  How does moving from one addiction (patriarchy) to 
> another (matriarchy) improve things?

Hold on there Daniel.  I said I would get to that at the end of my
last post.  Glad to see you are eager though.

There were really two things being discussed here, one my viewpoint of
men in general, and two, my being a female supremicist.  The two are
not completely related, so I am answering them in turn.  The addictive
model for me has little to do with my being a female supremicist. I
have answered this briefly before, I will attempt it again here.

I see the female as first, the one from which the male comes.  I see
the female as containing the male.  And I see the male as being sort
of a mutated female.

Some see the universe as created, molded by the hands of god, a
creation, like a piece of engineering, or a piece of pottery, planned
and built by God.  I see it more in terms of procreation.  To me the
universe is born, not created.  I see it as being born from the
Goddess, and being formed of her body.  I see the process of life
centering on birth, a bringing forth from within.  Creation is sort of
a molding of that which is seperate from self.  What others see as
asexual, I see as female, growing, splitting, and in a way giving
birth to the new.

So to me the Goddess is first.  To put it in a Taoist context, she is
the Tao.  The whole, that from which others come.  From her is born
the male.  An interesting mutation, that was pretty profitable as far
as evolution is concerned.  This is her son, seperated from her, the
one becomes two, yin and yang, goddess and god.  From the two, in
taoism, comes the myriad things, their children if you will, us. 

Maybe I have been too unclear as to my female supremacy thing.  I see
the male as being contained within the female.  I see myself as being
female at my very essence.  What should have been two x chromosomes
mutated, broken to become x and y.  

I think it is very importatn that I have an X chromosome.  If the male
were truly some separate animal, I suppose he would have two y's, but
the male is really a part of the race of woman.  Just a different kind
of woman.  A woman who has forgotten his roots.  An errant child of
the mother who has taken too much power for his kind, and tried to
define himself as separate, and her as inferior.  I see the whole adam
and eve thing as a lie to cover up the truth, in the beginning, there
was woman, we are her children.

So just as we are all from the body of the goddess, we are also all
born from the body of a woman, and are a part of her.  Man is a
carrier of her chromosomes, an opportunity for greater variety.  All
is to me essentially female.  I am a female supremicist. 

Men are so messed up, in my opinion, partially because they have
divided themselves from women, set themselves apart, and made up
different rules for men and women.   They have enforced them with
strength, and bullying, and peer pressure, and have created a world of
power-over, of value heirarchies. 

To me, men are not messed up because of their sex, but because of
their culture.  Men are scum, and I am a female supremicist.

I am too tired to proof this.  I hope it makes sense.  I suppose we
can discuss it more later.

-- 
___________________________________________________________________________

Stephen R. Figgins           |  There was an old woman
kumagic@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu   |  Who lived under the hill 
PO Box 1244                  |  And if she's not gone 
Lawrence, KS 66044	     |  She lives there still
___________________________________________________________________________