• /
  • /
  • Statement from CAYA Coven on Rite of Lilith at PantheaCon

Statement from CAYA Coven on Rite of Lilith at PantheaCon

Jason Pitzl-Waters —  March 2, 2011 — 64 Comments

Lady Yeshe Rabbit, High Priestess of CAYA Coven, and the clergy of Come As You Are Coven, have issued a statement on the Amazon Priestess Tribe’s Rite of Lilith at PantheaCon 2011. This ritual served as the catalyst for the current ongoing discussions regarding gender, inclusion, and religious freedom.

“The Clergy of Come As You Are Coven wish to address the recent events and conversations regarding gender discrimination and the Amazon Priestess Tribe’s Rite of Lilith at PantheaCon 2011. It is our intention that this statement will a) open an inclusive, compassionate and respectful dialogue, b) shed light on some points that require clarity due to miscommunication, lack of communication, and misinterpretation, and c) help heal any deliberate or inadvertent pain caused by anyone along the spectrum of this emotionally-charged matter. Please accept the following offerings as an invitation to share in conversation as well as mutual understanding with us.”

Rather than try to summarize, I recommend everyone involved in this current discussion read the entire statement.

In addition, the organizers of PantheaCon have released the following short statement.

“PantheaCon 2011 is over, but one event held there has sparked an important discussion that is currently ongoing online in personal blogs and community spaces.  We have not yet started meeting to plan PantheaCon 2012 but many of us are keeping track of these online discussions.  We need to be sure that whatever decisions are made are the right ones, and as such we ask for patience and the space to ensure that we can find the best path forward.

We welcome your comments and concerns in the coming months.  Please feel free to email feedback@pantheacon.com with any information you would like us to have – we can’t guarantee a response, but someone will be reading anything that is sent to that address.  We appreciate the diversity of opinion and tradition that all of you bring to PantheaCon and we will do our absolute best to weigh the many alternatives and make the right decision.”

I will keep you appraised of further developments, reports, and statements as they come to me.

In Paganism, Religion , , , , , ,
permalink

Jason Pitzl-Waters

Posts

  • Baruch Dreamstalker

    CAYA made a nice apology. Seems that most of the conversation here was pre-conceived positions (just my luck that I don't have one).

    • http://twitter.com/widdershins_cat @widdershins_cat

      On a larger scale, though? It's the pre-conceived positions that need to be drug out into the light of day. Sunlight, as the saying goes, is the best disinfectant – and the unaddressed cissexism in Paganism NEEDS to be disinfected, just as did unaddressed heterosexism a generation ago.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Chelsea-Rose/1008131810 Chelsea Rose

    Huh. I thought I had made a comment on this post but it doesn't seem to be showing up. 0.o.

    • Jason Pitzl-Waters

      I checked the moderation queue and there's nothing there from you. Maybe a glitch?

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Chelsea-Rose/1008131810 Chelsea Rose

        I guess so. :(

      • http://www.sihayadesigns.com Sihaya

        Could be a glitch! My comments have been appearing and disappearing all night… I've cleared out my browser cache a few times to be sure, too!

  • Jennifer Parsons

    (Full disclosure: A family friend whom I greatly admire is a CAYA clergy member; she officiated at my wedding.)

    Like Dreamstalker and others in the previous discussion, I think CAYA's apology was a good one– it stated that it thought its original reasons were appropriate, but attempted to be as considerate as possible to people who were offended by the event. Lady Rabbit's taking personal responsibility for the miscommunication which started the mess speaks well of her.

    I wonder if this whole messy argument could have been avoided if the description for the ritual clearly stated that only cis-women were allowed. I don't think it would have quelled the controversy, but because there was no one incident for everyone to react to, the debate would not have been as intense.

    That said, I'm intrigued as to whether or not any actual progress will come out of this particular firestorm, since it was so very intense and generated comment from so many different people.

  • wyse

    What happened to the over 100 comments?

  • Lina

    Thank you for posting this, I'm going to further add the posting on this issue from the Circle of Cerridwen which held the discussion on Monday at Pantheacon.
    http://cerridwen.st4r.org/wiki/index.php/Pantheac…

    Please to those that you see vilifying CAYA or the Amazons, stop them from doing so.

    Their error is plain to see, and they are learning the cost of it.

    We are witnessing the sides of a greater issue and while we may disagree, civility wins the day. Please remember this.

    • tadrakos

      First of all, I’d like to thank you personally for standing up for CAYA. I fully recognize that you have your own opinions about the whole topic, and that they may or may not agree with mine/ours, but in this week of watching the firestorm while we mustered our thoughts and feelings, yours has been one of the voices calling for calm, reasoned, discourse, and supporting CAYA when we were being vilified.

      Also, you met me, and not only were you lovely to me in person, I have since seen you defend me personally, and accurately repeat what I said and did that day. So, really, truly…

      Thank you.

      In case you’re interested, there are a few blogs going up from our clergy- mine is here- http://tadrakos.wordpress.com/2011/03/03/to-whom-… my friend rowan and I have a joint blog on which we’ve both discussed it- http://thewildegarden.com, another priestess' is here- http://ladybugsadventures.blogspot.com/2011/03/ge… and another priestess has her blog here -http://theprimalheart.blogspot.com/2011/03/gender-factor.html.

      • Nestis

        Thank you so very much for your statements.

      • Lina

        With all the graciousness I embody: You are welcome.

        It is not easy to maintain my own discretion on the boards and I have spoken my own opinion (not very much).

        We may agree on more than you realize, however, for the sake of the conversation I keep restating that, as a witness to the events in question, I will only speak to that.

        My opinions are my own and no one has asked me directly for them, so why share to an already muddied debate?

        I put the facts out there without bias and as I saw them and can recall (now almost three weeks removed).

        I can do not much more as it pains me to read the way we are willing to tear into each other without care or cause to our words.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Ron-Ritzer/1163038428 Ron Ritzer

    I read CAYA statements, and they really seemed to dance around the issue at hand rather than approach it directly.

    I suppose this is in general the reason I avoid Wicca and similar traditions along these lines, as their heavy emphasis upon gender roles doesn't suit my tastes in post modern pagan traditions, and seems to only create more divisiveness.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Chelsea-Rose/1008131810 Chelsea Rose

      Ah! Thank you. I was going to same the exact same thing but decided to keep quiet in case I was misreading it. It was very well-worded though it must be a bit political like that because this is a sticky issue, even more so when they take the position that I think they are taking (not that I find anything wrong with it, but some might).

      • http://erynn999.livejournal.com Erynn

        The statement from CAYA is a beginning, not an end. They were inviting people to discuss and dialogue with them, and I think that's a good thing.

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Chelsea-Rose/1008131810 Chelsea Rose

          Yes of course. And I didn't imply it was an end at all. :P

  • Wyse1

    It IS a sticky issue but it is one that we need to discuss. The ONLY good thing that is happening is we are aware of the problem and we can begin to bridge the gaps from this point. We know we need to shed light on those who need to better educate themselves on the plight of the GLBTQ community. The apology appeared to use excuses rather than a heart felt sorrow. Again the CAYA should use this moment to do research, to ask questions and show they are working towards a better understanding and awareness of TG. CAYA, in my opinion, should stand up and show other religions that they are willing to educate themselves and willing to be a truely enlightened faith. One that looks at the inside of a person and not just the outside. May they reach out in peace and in the spirit of learning to mend the damage that was done to our TG sisters and brothers.

  • http://norsealchemist.blogspot.com Norse Alchemist

    I personally think this issue is even more complicated than people are saying it is (and that's saying something).

    First off, the way I see it is this is still something of a Religious Freedom vs Civil Rights issue. Do we force a religion to change it's doctrine and teachings simply because some outside group feels they should be allowed in? (Would be we be having this conversation if it was Men or Trans-Men trying to get into the circle, or would people feel the Dianics have the right to ban Men from their circle). Or do we insist on being prejudiced against a group that may in fact have the right to be allowed in? To be honest, allowing trans-women into the Dianic circle isn't nearly as clean cut as allowing Blacks at the lunch counter was. Or maybe it is, I'm not sure. I think it is though…

    I've seen a lot of people attack the Dianics, but few seem to be considering what it would be like for us if our own traditions faced the larger Pagan community howling and frothing at us. I'm not saying their in the right, but we all should take a step back and remember what it's like to have people around us saying that we're wrong and we need to change. Everyone's talking about acceptance, but they seem to be showing in only one direction, and being rather intolerant in the other. We almost all became Pagans and Heathens because we wanted to get away from people who insisted we live a certain way. I suspect many Dianics are feeling betrayed and hurt that the larger Pagan community, rather than respecting their practices, or even tolerating them, is instead attacking them over this incident. I'm not saying they were morally right to exclude people from their event, simply that they have as much right to practice their ways as any of us. I know this isn't really an issue for most of us, even folkish Asatru such as myself generally don't care about race or gender as long as you prove yourself honorable, live by the laws of the Hall, and are good to your fellow Kin. But I would hate to see my path go through something like this and be bashed by the larger community for practicing as we see fit.

    Perhaps it is my Folkish Asatru path that leads me to be hesitant to attack the Dianics. Not that we have any problem attacking, our nature is know to be somewhat more confrontational than most other paths. But still, knowing that my path is sometimes attacked as Racist, even when we're not, leads me to be slow jumping on the bandwagon for "tolerance." Are the Dianics being trans-phobic sexists? I don't know, but I'm not going to insist they are, simply because they feel that cis-women or whatever you call someone who is born female mechanically and mentally should have their own sacred path without anyone else being allowed in. I've heard that some Dianics can be very misandrist, but I'm not going to insist they change simply because they hate or dislike men. Same for the Wiccans, who I've read and heard have a similar attitude. I don't want them insisting I change my religion.

    I believe everyone should have the same rights as everyone else (unless they have proven themselves unworthy, such as a criminal not having the right to vote). That said, no one has the right to infringe upon the rights of another person, and that's basically what I think is happening here, on both sides. The Dianics feel that their right to a bio-woman only group is being violated, and the trans-women feel their right to be accepted everywhere bio-women are is being violated. In a way, they're both right. But it's not our place to decide who is "more right" here.

    I constantly see people saying "Stop the Hate." Well, maybe it's time we did the same, and stop hating one group for what they've done to another, possibly without any malicious intent. The Dianics have a right to practice their religion as they see fit. It doesn't matter if we don't like how they do it. We who do not belong to the Dianic path, should show them the same respect we wish them to show us. We wouldn't like them telling us how to practice our paths, would we?

    • Nestis

      Thank you.

    • http://www.sihayadesigns.com Sihaya

      The way I look at it, Dianics can practice as they choose. But if their words and/or actions are transphobic (as the quote that has been attributed to Z Budapest most certainly is!), other people have the right to criticize that group. Calls for change may be made. They may not be able to perform certain rituals at pro-inclusion events. They do not have to be heeded the calls for change, as they have the right to conduct their rites as they choose, but if they do not, the criticism will likely continue.

      That's just the way it is. Freedom of religion does not equal freedom from criticism.

      • http://www.sihayadesigns.com Sihaya

        Rather, they may not have to heed calls for change… (is what I meant to say!)

        Sorry, it's late, and I should be in bed! :)

  • Wyse1

    Really? We are going to use the excuse of "it's my right to discriminate"? This is a civil rights matter when it comes to GLBTQ community. They are fighting a huge battle on all fronts. Are we going to be on the side of the close minded religions who say it is their religious right to shun them as well? So yes….stop the hate.

    • http://www.facebook.com/RevCrystal.Blanton Crystal Blanton

      I don't think this is about having the right to discriminate. It is about honoring the many different paths and traditions in our culture. I don't go to the Gards and tell them that I feel they should change because I don't like the way the do (blank) or go to the santerian traditions and say that I don't want them to do (blank). We all have different practices and we have the right to those. What we do owe eachother is respect and empathetic understanding. Spirituality is not meant to offend and many times communication can help that. Rabbit states she did not communicate this well. She has owned that piece.

      But lets also remember that CAYA has a mens group, an open women's group, a children's group and a open group. That is not discriminating!!! There are opportunities for everyone to participate.

      • Wyse1

        Then where to TG's fit in. The are outwardly one being and inside another. So no there is not opportunities for everyone.

        • Nestis

          Did you even read CAYA Coven's statement? Both the Grove of Artemis and Grove of Hecate are open to all who identify as women.

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Grey-Wolf/100001185579028 Grey Wolf

          In our statement we also mention that for the last 5 years we have conducted complete Wheel of the Year sabbats that we refer to in all of our announcements as "Sabbats for All." We have never turned anyone away from these rituals for any reason. We welcome and honor the old and young alike, those able and those not – making our best effort to have activities that all can join in. There are families and solos, straight couples and gay, poly groups of mixed- and same-sex pairings. And honestly, that can also refer to our Clergy for the most part as well.

          In many of our sabbat circles we have welcomed in one-gender, no-gender, and multi-gender deities. We have had our female clergy welcoming in male deity, and male clergy welcoming female-identified deity. This is something we work at and decided long ago to make a part of our public offerings.

          CAYA Coven offers many circles to this community – as I mentioned, Sabbats for ALL, The Grove of Artemis for self-identified women and the Brotherhood of the Moon for self-identified men. Each of these circles over the last many years has welcomed transgendered individuals to join us in celebration of the divine that exists within each and every one of us.

          There is no exclusion for anyone who approaches us in respect and reverence.

    • Nestis

      You're misrepresenting the GLBTQ community as being some kind of homogenous entity. There is a lot of internal dissent and disagreement in that community, even between transgender people who identify as queer and transexuals who want to be fully integrated into the heteronormative gender binary of the majority culture.

      And Dianic trad is FULL of lesbians, in case anyone forgot, so this is not a simple case of a bunch of het ciswomen asserting privilege over transwomen. We're talking about marginalized people drawing their lines in the sand and other marginalized people feeling further marginalized because of it.

      • Wyse1

        I read it and I read the comments by the Dianic leader Z. Not only am I mortified at the comments but by the people who hold the same point of view. Since coming to Paganism many years ago there has been a feeling of peace and a sense of coming home. But the comments hit my heart hard and the tears began to fall. I weep for what was lost. To have a leader say those nasty things is heart wrenching.

        • Jennifer Parsons

          Our leaders are human– like you, I was disappointed to find such ugly statements attributed to someone whose work I've appreciated. But Z Budapest is not infallible; she's subject to the same cruelties and bigotries as the rest of us mere mortals.

          My full disclosure above in mind, I'd like to point out that there's a world of difference between Lady Yeshe Rabbit's statement– which sounds like she and the Amazons are open to discussion– and Z Budapest's vitriolic rampage. Even people who support the Amazons' decisions sound disgusted by Budapest's alleged statement.

          • Nestis

            Thank you. I didn't think I needed to remind people that Z is not the Dianic Pope. I do not stand by what she said, and I am deeply hurt and angered by it.

            I agree with you Wyse1, to have a leader say those nasty things IS heart wrenching. Particularly when she is a respected leader of one's own tradition.

    • finnchuillsmast

      This attitude remains shocking. I wonder if any of the persons who were discriminated against have sought counsel from a lawyer. This could end up in a big lawsuit. Usually takes a lawsuit to bring change.

      • Jennifer Parsons

        Unfortunately, I don't think a lawsuit will help for an American case like this– while most of us our offended, this is still a matter of private worship on private property.

        I'm very sympathetic to the transwomen who were turned away from the Lilith rite, but if I were a lawyer, I wouldn't touch a lawsuit– the risk of setting a bad precedent ("Because you are not allowed to turn anyone away, Nordic Pagans must now allow anti-Semetic Pagan groups to worship with them, despite their painful efforts to distance themselves from that smear over the years.") is very, very high.

        If change comes, I can see it coming from the people who persistently and civilly question the Amazons' decision. The eloquent arguments I've seen here supporting transwomen (one poster's statement of "moon in eclipse" to describe transfemale sexuality is particularly beautiful) I think will go a long way.

        Keep in mind that several decades earlier, homosexuality in Paganism was a taboo. That eventually changed, and I think this will too.

      • Cathryn Bauer

        I very much doubt a lawsuit would be the way to go here. As I understand the law, neither Pcon nor CAYA are under any legal obligation to open their rituals to anyone. Item: I am a court reporter, not an attorney or a judge; these are my opinions only. With that caveat, based on what I've seen in court settings, I believe that most attorneys would be extremely reluctant to bring this matter before a judge. Despite their size and attendant publicity, Pantheacon and CAYA are private organizations, not public ones; as I understand it, this limits their legal obligations to be inclusive. It is my belief that this is what a judge or arbitrator would rule. As much as I dislike CAYA and their exclusion, their only tangible accountability in this matter is to the Pantheacon organizers. I will be addressing my thoughts there, certainly, and hope others who feel strongly will focus there, as well.

        I'm all for legal action when it's warranted. Indeed, I think many people do not realize how many protections they have under the law when it comes down to it, but that's another topic entirely. However, legal action can also be time-consuming, emotionally and financially wearing, and render reunification. I neither wish nor suggest this in this situation.

        And I do believe that CAYA has amply apologized for this. I further believe important issue have been brought up for discussion and that Paganism will ultimately be stronger for this conflict. Let the respectful, thoughtful, and realistic dialogue continue.

        • finnchuillsmast

          Good points. I also feel like contacting PantheaCon organizers on this directly is the way to go now.

      • chuck_cosimano

        A lawsuit involving a religious body deciding who can take part in its rituals? It would never even be given a hearing.

  • Wyse1

    HARM YE NONE.

    • http://vermillionrush.wordpress.com Vermillion

      …works great if you subscribe to the Wiccan rede! But a lot of Pagans don't because they're not Wiccan. And I don't think this is a Wicca-only issue, although the Dianic Wiccans seem to be getting the brunt of people's rage.

    • http://norsealchemist.blogspot.com Norse Alchemist

      But aren't you Harming the dianics with your attitude?

      • Wyse1

        I don't fall for that "I am discrimating against those who oppress" Nope that dog won't hunt. I *used* to be Dianic but I could not stand the cis privlidge attitude. That being aside, no one is saying that they need to accept anyone into their "private circles" THIS was a PUBLIC event. CAYA is already made apology and is on the road to bridging the gaps. I personally find exclusion wrong but I won't tell people what to do within their groups where the public is not invited. The fact is this was a public event and the TG people were judged not woman enough to enter.

  • Wyse1

    What is the harm in allowing the TG to embrace who the are in the inside? Why tuck them in a corner and not allow them to embrace who they are?

    • http://norsealchemist.blogspot.com Norse Alchemist

      There is no harm, nor is anyone (except perhaps Z) saying that there is. Even the Dianics here. But I would ask academically, what is the harm in allowing ciswomen their own private place?

      • Wyse1

        Again the event was public.

  • Wyse1

    Where is the HONOR in telling a TG woman that she is not enough of a woman to be included?

    • http://norsealchemist.blogspot.com Norse Alchemist

      Probably the same place where the Honor is in calling all Dianics "transphobic witches" who need to have their ways forcibly altered, persecuted, and bashed because of this incident.

      Don't get me wrong, I'm not entirely sure the Dianics did the right thing at PCon, but I certainly don't think we have the right to force a path not our own to change to fit our views. I'm a Folkish Asatru, I'm sure I could find plenty of theological issues with the Dianic Path, but I'm not going to insist they change their practices. Sometimes the best thing is not to insist someone change their path to suit you, but to go and walk your own path and rise above it. I'm not going to insist the transwomen be banned or be let it. It's not my path. I'm just gonna call for a little understanding of both parties, not jumping on the bandwagon of bashing the ciswomen who want a private space of their own. That's discrimination and harmful too.

  • Lesley

    It has been many years since I left the general Pagan community in favour of an indigenous religion and it is obvious that many new issues have arisen since then but this is an old heartfelt issue for me too and, for this reason, I hope you do not mind me commenting.

    Much has been said of the inherent sexism of cis (I hope this is the correct term) women-only space but I am unsure whether many of these comments are coming from people who understand the role that such a sanctuary plays for (cis) women in embracing the aspects of being female that are denigrated and degraded by society. Perhaps young women now have a different lot in life but those of us who are older and remember the age of Greer's Female Eunuch and the oppression of the natural woman by enforced femininity and over-domestication have need of exactly the sanctuary that the Amazon tribe and other Dianics offer. I remember the joy and acceptance I found within myself as a part of (cis) women-only space and it is something that I have carried with me proudly every day since then regardless of where I have gone. I know that my son would never have been born and grown up to be the young man he is had I not spent the years I did in the sanctity of women-only space and all they have to teach when they feel free to do so.

    From what I have read of this issue, it is largely concerned with the right of transgender women to be accepted as women by other women. I can understand and respect this completely. There should be sacred space where transgender women can join with cis women to embrace being women.
    However, something important has been left unsaid as to why it is simultaneously necessary for there to be separate sacred spaces for both groups of women. Not because of sexist discrimination or a rejection of the right of transgender women to self-identify but because of the different issues about womanhood that must be dealt with by cis and transgender women. In my experience cis women's space is often about transcending the notions of femininity enforced on us and overcoming the guilt of women's sexuality and menstruation that we experience as young girls and that later hinders us as adults. This is a different challenge to the one transgender women face. Both groups of women have the right to create the sacred space where they can overcome their different challenges among others who share their difficulties.

    I would strongly urge all transgender women to come together and create a women's only space that is uniquely their own. The fruits of such an experience will enrich them forever. I also recognise the growing need for a common womens-only space for both cis and transgender women together. Both groups of women can only benefit from such an endeavour.

    And finally to those Dianics and other female separatists who vigilantly maintain the integrity of cis women's only space, I salute you and I thank you from the bottom of my heart. I would never have reached psychological maturation as a woman had it not been for women like you. You provide a vital service to so many girls who grow up to need the sanctity you offer. Most people will never understand who you are and what you do but stand firm. You are greatly needed and appreciated by those of us who have been graced to know you and your sisters.

    • Old Druid

      Thank you, that was very well said.

  • Califried

    Well, that was a mostly meaningless statement that effectively boils down to “CAYA is inclusive except when it isn’t, and gosh darn it some of us like not being inclusive!” I also like the ongoing “respect our religious freedom!” mantra, as well as Rabbit’s distancing of herself from the Rite of Lilith (and the Amazon Priestess Tribe) held at PantheaCon even though she organized the ritual. She also gets bonus points for mentioning in her statement for the PNC Bay Area report that’s now up that a transwoman was part of the ritual and was treated with “every courtesy,” even though her intent had been to exclude transwomen from the ritual entirely.

    Of course, even though Rabbit was taught by Z, founded CAYA, takes part in CAYA Amazon rituals, organized the specific ritual at PantheaCon with the intent of excluding transwomen, failed to write a program description that effectively articulated the exclusionary criteria, and tried to get folks excluded anyway, there’s no reason for anyone to be upset here because she ultimately let one transwoman in! CAYA is inclusive!

    …Except when it isn’t.

    If the “discernment process about creating public ritual proposals” referenced in the letter actually results in public ritual proposals that include all self-identified women, of course, then that would be a meaningful, substantive change that should be applauded. Until then, the statement is effectively a not-pology.

  • Rabbit

    Califried, and others, so much of what you say here is based on erroneous assumptions and lack of information. I would love the opportunity to talk with you about these thoughts, and others you have expressed elsewhere. It is my every intention to move forward in a loving and inclusive way on this important issue, with or without the support or participation of others in the Traditions I am affiliated with (which are, actually, several-one Dianic.) Please, in order to help us both move forward without pain, send me an email with your phone # to the cayacoven@gmail.com address with best dates/times to call you so that we can reach understanding, so that I can hear and witness your thoughts/feelings, and so that there might be true building instead of all this tearing down. I’m not distancing myself from this at all. I’m right here. Are you willing to join me in actual, verbal presence toward concordance?

    In love and trust,
    Rabbit

  • Califried

    Rabbit,

    Thank you for the response. It’s always a positive thing when we’re able to engage in an open dialogue on these issues. Try as I might, however, I find it a bit difficult to join you in actual, verbal presence toward concordance while we have your stated belief that my comments proceed from erroneous assumptions and/or a lack of information lingering in the air. Here are the assertions from my previous comment that may be in question:

    1. You take part in CAYA Amazon rituals
    2. You organized the ritual at PantheaCon and intended to exclude transwomen from it (a reasonable assumption as it was organized by CAYA’s Amazon Priestess Tribe)
    3. You wrote a description of the ritual that did not convey that the ritual was intended for cisgendered women only
    4. After several individuals who you intended to exclude (including some men) showed up for your ritual, you sought to have them excluded
    5. When the job of excluding them fell to you, you made a statement that evidently convinced several (presumably cisgendered) men and transwomen to leave
    6. At least one trans individual remained and took part in the ritual

    I welcome any correction you have to offer to the above list. When I wrote that you were distancing yourself from the ritual in question, I should have been clearer: you take responsibility for the poorly-worded description but choose not to address any of the events at PantheaCon or the rationale behind organizing the ritual as you did. This choice may well be due to your desire to move the conversation forward and leave the Rite of Lilith behind, but I hope you can see why your statement might reasonably be considered a not-pology.

    “Actual, verbal presence toward concordance” means very different things to different people. If the “discernment process about creating public ritual proposals” referenced in the statement results in inclusive rituals at PantheaCon, I will personally applaud the change as it would represent a commitment beyond “if we want to exclude trans individuals from future rituals, we will use clearer language.” From all other perspectives, however, I suggest we are already in concordance. I fully support the right of CAYA’s Amazons to hold cisgendered women’s rituals in private spaces. I may not condone the cisgendered/transgendered division which underlies that choice, but it is always your right to make it. For that reason, the ball is firmly in your court – only you and your fellow clergy can determine whether CAYA’s private Tradition will open their ritual spaces at public conventions to trans individuals. I hope that you will make the decision to be inclusive.

    • Lina

      I am appreciative of your need to ask these questions of Rabbit, however, I don't see how making these remarks in the hopes of your own personal understanding on Rabbit's stance furthers the discussion.

      Please consider her offer to discuss this in private with her.

      Also, please read the Circle of Cerridwen's statement because they led the discussion on Monday and they helped with getting this greater discussion going.
      http://cerridwen.st4r.org/wiki/index.php/Pantheac…

      For the record I was there, I can attest to what was meant and what was done by CAYA and the Amazons at the ritual and the events that went from there.

      Please take a moment to realize that this is much bigger than CAYA or the Amazons, it's bigger than we could have imagined.

      Thank you,
      Lina

      • Califried

        I don't see how making these remarks in the hopes of your own personal understanding on Rabbit's stance furthers the discussion.

        Lina, it can be very difficult to move forward when one party goes out of their way to assert that critics are simply misinformed. Since you are concerned about rhetoric, you are undoubtedly aware that this is a common rhetorical tactic. In this case, Rabbit specifically called me out for "erroneous assumptions and lack of information" – as such I welcome any corrections she wishes to offer. My understanding of what occurred at PantheaCon is supported by all public accounts of which I'm aware, including the PNC report linked above. Noting the facts on the ground does not represent an indictment of Rabbit (or incivility) unless Rabbit does not want it to be known, for example, that she organized the Rite of Lilith with the intention of excluding transwomen.

        Now, this issue inarguably is larger than CAYA or the Amazons. I'm all for civility – in fact, I would suggest that I have been quite civil in this discussion. I'm also all for moving the conversation forward, just not at the expense of recognizing and understanding where we've been. "Moving the conversation forward" does not mean allowing rhetorical tricks (e.g. "so much of what you say here is based on erroneous assumptions and lack of information") to end all discussion about the specific catalyst for this conversation. If CAYA's Amazon Priestess Tribe maintains the status quo and holds another ritual at PantheaCon next year that excludes trans individuals, that is itself a problem in my view. It is a problem worth discussing, and one that I'm not personally willing to drop because the problem is technically bigger than CAYA. Hope that helps.

        • Lina

          But the main first point that you are overlooking is the fact that CAYA and the Amazons did not mean to be exclusionary.

          Their programming failed to mention that this was a ritual for cisgendered women only.

          However, I a genderqueer bio-female attended and participated.

          I do not recall anyone getting kicked out once the doors were shut and I should know, I was in the second chair to the left of the doors. My former high priestess and still very close friend was in the first.

          Ask questions of me about the events that transpired after the ritual. I was there for the meeting at the firepit, I was there for the conversation had with the P-con staff.

          • Lina

            I was there for the tail-end of the discussion with the Circle of Cerridwen and I have been involved in this ongoing discussion.

            I have seen the words we use and I am merely re-stating what I feel needs to be said.

            We can continue down these road of you asking questions but are you asking questions as well of the Circle of Cerridwen on their position and their thoughts about CAYA and the Amazon's statement?

            I would appreciate that you ask of both sides how they feel about it and where they stand in reference to each other because they are the catalysts both. CAYA and the Amazons for their error and the Circle of Cerridwen for providing us with plenty to talk about.

            Lina

    • Lina

      I appreciate the comments directed towards Rabbit and I am sure that they answer questions you have of her.

      However, I will direct you the Circle of Cerridwen's statement as they originated the discussion on Monday, http://cerridwen.st4r.org/wiki/index.php/Pantheac… as I believe that at this point, we need to work on the greater community (which means we should be focusing on other groups and ourselves and look at the moves that we make towards inclusion or exclusion and what guides those motives).

      • Lina

        CAYA makes it quite clear that it is an INCLUSIVE group, and within it there are branches that have their own rules as to who they allow in. These are by invitation only. It is up to them what their practices and rules are.

        THIS is bigger than CAYA or Rabbit or the Amazons or your personal direct questions.

        Rabbit is offering to lend her voice to her actions and that is all we can ask of a leader; accountability and honesty in the process. Please speak to her directly. She has offered so in good-faith that you will be willing to take her up on this. I am sure you will not the be only one who wants to, and I am sure that she has a long day ahead of her still. Probably a long many days.

        • Lina

          Please note that we are trying to maintain civility. There are other areas that make much bigger attacks on the Dianics and we should be holding each other accountable.

          Are we not a community? Are we not a brotherhood and a sisterhood that should be able to hold ourselves up to the light of scrutiny without casting stones at each other in the process?

          I am disheartened by the rhetoric I have seen displayed. I have been asked and have asked if it would help things to make a personal statement that would be distributed in order for people to know the facts as an eyewitness to a lot of the events that transpired.

          I would do so, if I felt that my words would receive the heeding they deserved. I fear that would not be the case. I maintain that this is bigger than ONE organization or ONE branch of paganism.

          Civility, please, let that win the day.
          Lina

  • Rabbit

    I think it's fair to say that I, too, am having trouble reaching actual, verbal concordance with you an several others in the web world a) when you have publicly lambasted me without so much as a conversation and b) won't consent to actually talk with me person-to-person. The challenge here is that I HAVE extended to you the invitation to talk together. You have not reached out to me in any way, though invited to do so, and you appear to insist that we have this conversation in the comments section of a blog. I'm sorry but that is just not my style of relating, especially when issues of trust and hurt are involved all around. Please do consider my sincere invitation to an actual, verbal dialogue toward concordance.

    I do not take exception to the following:

    As per historical precedent at the privately-hosted event that is PantheaCon, the Amazons organized a closed ritual for cisgendered women, which I failed to clearly communicate in the program. I am so very, very sorry about that- you have no idea. I do believe this conversation would have risen anyway even if I had not erred, as it right for this moment in history. I trust the Divine is speaking to us all about this issue, and that it has arisen in perfection of timing and circumstance for true healing to begin. As the founder of the Amazons, I certainly take part in our rites.

    However, I did not "seek" to exclude anyone. That was not the objective of the ritual at all, nor the intention with which it was planned. We were under the impression, due to past experience, that closed rituals at Pcon were acceptable and would yield no harm, as there are many diverse Trads and groups which have offered closed rituals without riling anyone up. The objective was specific to healing around issues about the menstrual/birth mysteries and how they relate to Lilith, shame about the female body and desire in cis women. I did, indeed, ask Con staff to admit women only, and when asked I did make a respectful request that anyone who "would not be comfortable naked as a woman among naked women" please leave us to it. I never explicitly said Trans women could not attend, but I do not deny that we did not plan the ritual with Trans women in mind. I apologized for the confusion, promised that "next year we will submit a more inclusive offering" and then went into ritual. There was, indeed, at least one woman in attendance who we believe was a TG sister (though we would not actually know for sure because, contrary to popular opinion, no one is doing parts/chromosome checks at the doors of our rituals.) We included everyone who actually came in the door at this ritual. I cannot speak to your assertion that multiple men were turned away. I DID speak personally with one man I know who wanted to attend, explained and apologized, we hugged and kissed and he went on his way with no ill will that I could perceive.

    The decision to become inclusive in public spaces was actually made right then and there, when I announced that next year we would create more inclusive ritual proposals for PCon. I said it then, we said it as a Coven in our public statement, and I will repeat it once more now. CAYA HAS ALWAYS OFFERED INCLUSIVE RITUALS AND WE AMAZONS ARE PLANNING INCLUSIVE RITUAL PROPOSALS FOR PCON NEXT YEAR. I am happy to keep repeating this, but no amount of repetition of the phrase is going to make next year and that reality come any faster. Why don't you plan to come and see for yourself, IF our proposal is accepted by the event organizers, that our intentions re trustworthy.

    The other thing that I take exception to is that you say I was trained by Z Budapest. I was not. I WAS ordained by her. She has often said publicly that I arrived to her fully-formed in my priestesshood, which I did. Ordination in Z's HPS lineage is conferred as an acknowledgement for public service accomplishments on behalf of women, not at the end of a course of training. Z does not speak for me, nor I for her, nor does anyone monolithically represent the Dianic voice. The Dianic voice is the collective voice of ALL women. We are all different people, trying to do what we feel is best for the Goddess and for ourselves. I feel that I am in service to ALL women by engaging in this dialogue and committing to creating inclusive Goddess space, while still holding space for my own personal needs. The other Amazons and I are currently making contact with Trans sisters and allies locally and all over the country: listening, discussing, laughing, crying, and healing. You're welcome to be part of that. Your opinion of these efforts may vary, but that's all we can actually do right now.

    If you would like to be part of the discussion that informs how we Amazons approach this healing between two historically-disenfranchised groups, please contact me. But I'm not going to engage in any more back-and-forth with you or anyone else on this blog. It's just not my way. I responded to this because you do not seem to think I m sorry enough, and I don't think that's fair if you haven't talked with me. Invite still open.

    In love and trust,
    Rabbit

    • Califried

      Rabbit,

      I will keep this reply brief as I've been writing quite a lot in Jason's space over the last few days. I owe you an apology for my poorly-worded and poorly-edited initial post in this comment thread – there was no need to reference your ordination (I promise, it was a poorly-chosen word on my part and nothing more) and no real need to engage in snark, even if your statement seemed to be exactly as I was describing it at the time. At the very least, I should have been more mindful of the fact that you and other CAYA members have undoubtedly received quite a lot of angry messages from a number of individuals – there was simply no need to add to that number.

      For the record, I was not and am not asking for additional apologies, and I am not trying to chide you for not being sorry enough. I do want to say one thing about intention, though. At no point was I trying to communicate that you designed your ritual as you did with the express intent of harming transwomen, or that you were thinking explicitly about excluding transwomen from it in exactly those words – revisiting my earlier post, I see that I did use the wrong word (intent vs. intention). What I should have communicated is that, regardless of conscious intent, your intention was to create a ritual that would be for cisgendered women only (i.e. it would exclude transwomen). That intention, however it is expressed, is experienced by transwomen as oppression. That brings me back to rituals at PantheaCon.

      Until now, I had not seen a public commitment to inclusive rituals by your Amazon Priestess Tribe. I am more than willing to take your word for it, although I think you may want to consider revisiting the exact wording of CAYA's statement if such a decision has already been reached – I know I am not the only person who did not take that meaning away after reading through it. I applaud the decision and appreciate the fact that you have been willing to engage in dialogue with people who are angry with you right now. Be well.

  • Bookhousegal

    I appreciate CAYA's stance on this, (And I think it's a perfectly-valid apology and clarification on that trad's actua position on such things: I don't know if you happened to note any of my comments, but I think we'd actually be in agreement there. I *don't* think it's at all unreasonable to to have specific rituals specifically for ciswomen, at least when it's actually about something unique to ciswomen. I also think the big conflict here is more about people connecting that to the absolutist stances that may conflict over 'Who's men and women, who says so, and when and how is this inclusion or prejudice.')

    Most of the real conflict is from people applying transphobic stances and defiinitions of people to this, people who believe in total inclusion of everyone everywhere for everything, perhaps, and those who seem to like to claim Wicca's in general more gender-polarized/transphobic than it'd seem from more Wiccan points of view than it actually is.

    The transphobic screed attributed to Z. Budapest was both uncalled for, unhelpful to any 'side,' and also reflects unfortunately, what a lot of trans people and others have become accustomed to *see,* not just from too much of what presents as authority on 'womyn's spirituality' but also certain elements in the broader society.

    These transphobic attitudes were in fact once a lot more common than they are now: and some of it still does fester a bit out there.

    It seems that by making some intentions unclear, this ritual rather stepped on a lot of them, and I'd also rather see trans people of activist stripes show a little more care in choices of where the real fights are.

    I think a real strength of this Pagan community is in fact not only our ability to accept diversity, but also to *change,* and *evolve,* and even to subdivide to various ends without it having to be judging the total worth or identity of someone…. I think this incident and controversy around it is an example of how this capacity wasn't properly honored, …in some ways perhaps because we take so much for *granted* among ourselves. (And sometimes, perhaps, those of us who are more separate may come to something like a Patheacon with ideas everyone must have the same assumptions as they. If that was Z Budapest thinking people would take it on presumption or her authority who are men and who are women, well, she sure found out she had another thing coming, didn't she?)

    I think it's important to realize that CAYA's perspective on this is *not* so polarized, but it's also on them to be sure that they've really examined if among the Amazons there might really be more transphobia than is needed to have menstrual-related ritual. (It's not like there's anything wrong with that, but one might question: are transwomen defined out of 'womanhood' just so that it can be said to be 'inclusive of all women' even if perhaps they've had hysterectomies, etc… is that shifting certain uncomfortable burdens (like 'fertility privilege,' ) onto a still-more-oppressed minority's very identities, instead of clearly articulating the purpose.

    Likewise, I don't think we need to deny the power and need for specific rituals for specific people and specific experiences.

    • Bookhousegal

      Personally, I'm a bit of a wild-card when it comes to stuff like this. Kind of one of the 'sporks in the Lady's silverware drawer.' :) Sometimes you need a fork, and sometimes you need a spoon, sometimes some of both will do, and well, you tend to get left out of place settings when things get formal. :) Still, as that metaphor goes, I think as a community we're no longer in a place where everyone's like, 'Well, if you're not one or the other, you're just no good for anything, are you?'

      (Unfortunately, this is not the direction much of the wider society has really taken things.)

      Cause, by the way, we're past the theory on most of this: we know transpeople for talented and valued members of out community, all dualisms or silverware metaphors aside. That's why categorical exclusion as a rule and by definition sucks, and why *inclusion* doesn't have to mean ignoring or grinding away all differences.

      And, really, the more 'essentialist' or dualist one tries to be about sex, the bigger the 'third gender' gets. :)

      Meanwhile, as someone not-very-polarized, I actually often feel the polarization the more-keenly. I'm pretty adaptable, shapeshiftey, even, can fill all kinds of gaps but, you know, 'one of the boys' can have its limits. You can feel that. (Like, I woudn't screw up Hunt mysteries, but you probably wouldn't want me along if it was a lad's right of passage in many forms, and in general, I tend to generally encourage 'guy time,' even if they tend to be pretty inclusive. Then again, I've actually attended the bachelor party instead of the bridal shower, and, while I learned a *lot,* and it was fascinating, …also made sense at the time, you can't un-see that. :)

      Similar with 'girl stuff.' I can *do* the 'mystical connection with the land' stuff, and as for my fertility blessings, well, in my home scape, there's like three or four toggle switches with the striped yellow guards on em, with two keys to the clear plastic case over the flashing red 'COMMIT' button, but I'm probably not your first choice for a Moon-lodge either. For almost *exactly* the same reasons.

      And it's also why transwomen are caught on tines of the very same fork that divides 'waves' of feminism:

      If fertility, conformity, or abstract binary 'Way God/dess Made You One Or The Other' or 'Energy' *define* 'Who's a man, Who's a Woman,' (implied: Be One Or The Other Like We Say, And Only So,) …It's just about *how.* Control, definitions, boundaries. As absolutes and reactions, not as things we can actually feel and know and honor before the Gods.

      Becomes about things and ideas and absolutes becoming other than what they *are* …not some human experiences we bring before the Gods, but some notions that *people* claim they can impose and claim they come *from* the Gods.

      The very sort of 'top-down' notions of defining identity that we mostly like to say come from the root-*up.* Together.

      Quite a thing to load how you bill a hotel ballroom booking onto, eh? :)

      Which brings us back to the fact that it's a personality/political conflict about issues surrounding….

      A program schedule?

      We circle up, all of us, according to a spirit of 'perfect love and perfect trust,' …..Not about who's defined as 'trusty' regarding the *box* the Circle might be in.

      That goes both ways, and all ways, and it also means we're allowed to screw up a little without having to redefine the universe or other people. And *that* goes all ways. If we as Pagans have a common core of *faith,* I think it much involves the fact that if we *do* this, we can figure it out. Not insist as preconditions or force it, …figure it out. We should gather so in as many ways and combinations as *possible,* not try to make any given definition law before we even 'get in the door.'

      In Circle, we *make* the door. If there isn't one, we *cut* the door. Similar goes for 'walls.' :)

      Blessed be and all. :)

  • A.C. Fisher Aldag

    Advice from my Gramma: If a group doesn't wanna let you play in their treehouse, fine. They can exclude you if they wish. Go build your own, bigger, nicer, fancier treehouse; you'll prolly have much more fun.

  • B. C.

    As a cis-woman who studies and practices within a Dianic circle, I must say that the issue of trans-exclusion is one that has always bothered me, and I am glad to see that this issue came up at PantheaCon because it is a dialogue that is both necessary and important to modern Pagan practice. I am a bisexual woman and an LGBT rights activist and I have many friends and acquaintances who are transgender, and while I have been given several well-reasoned arguments for trans-exclusion in Dianic Wicca, well-reasoned and justifiable are two entirely different things. I believe transwomen to be women, period, and I believe that excluding transwomen because they were not born with a uterus or a vagina does far more harm than good, particularly because one of the things I love about Wicca and Paganism is the inclusiveness and commitment to equality that most Pagan groups have at their core. I don't have the right to decide whether someone really is a woman or not, and I certainly don't have the right to question another woman's connection to the Goddess AS a woman. Yes, our experiences as women differ in many ways, but the same is true between myself and a woman who was raised in a different social class, a different religion, a different sexual orientation, or a different culture. To me, a woman-only space that includes transwomen is NOT offensive or in violation of my beliefs in the sacred feminine or in Her sacred mysteries, and I do not consider myself to be more legitimately female than a transwoman. I would welcome transwomen in any circle, ESPECIALLY a public circle. I just wish other Dianics felt the same way. But if you were to ask why I remain a Dianic, it's because I believe change comes from within, and that can't happen if I'm not there to do anything about it. Of course, this also presents an opportunity for the creation of a trans-inclusive women-only Goddess tradition or even a trans-specific tradition. The possibilities are endless. I wish my trans-sisters the best of luck in finding a tradition and a practice that fits their needs fully and which welcomes them with open arms, and I hope that one day, this will include Dianic Wicca as well.

    • http://maewitch.livejournal.com/ Maggie

      "well-reasoned and justifiable are two entirely different things"

      Great post overall, but I think this really deserves to be highlighted.