we have brains

Is there room for Women's Religion in the Women's Movement?

October 12, 2003 12:17 AM posted by morgaine : track it (0)

Some time ago, I wrote a letter to Ms. Magazine concerning an article written by Margot Adler. (You can read it here http://www.the-goddess.org/blog/index.html - scroll down to December 2002). Ms. Adler is the daughter of noted Psychologist Lewis Adler, and is a noted Feminist and Pagan author. I objected to the fact that the tone of the piece seemed not just deferential, but apologetic for being Goddess oriented. I felt that the premiere Feminist publication should be more accepting of the only Woman-centric Religion.

The questions I propose for this week: Does sisterhood extend to our spirituality as well as our politics? Are Goddess Feminists welcome in the Women's Movement, or are they a distraction? An embarrassment? Does the fact that the Judeo-Christian faiths practiced by the majority of Americans subordinate women to varying degrees mean that we should avoid the subject altogether? How do you feel about President Bush stating that it is not a religion?

« the olde patriarchy debate | whb homepage | grrrly news 10/12 »

your comments : post a new comment

Full response is here. We did have a similar topic in the past year, but Morgaine is posing this in a different way, so I don't think it will be repetitive at all.

Posted by: kerri on October 12, 2003 09:21 PM |

My response to Kerri hereYour serve, cookie.(I'm starting to enjoy this)

Posted by: Morgaine Swann on October 12, 2003 11:00 PM |

My post is up here.

Posted by: Vic... on October 13, 2003 09:22 AM |

I wrote and wrote and wrote and wrote. It's on my blog.

While there are plenty of issues with Ms., I think it's important to remember that no religious perspective makes you automatically a feminist. There is no "feminist" religion.

Posted by: april on October 13, 2003 01:48 PM |

"There is no "feminist" religion. " - April

According to whom? Are you stating that as doctrine, or dogma, or opinion?

Posted by: Morgaine Swann on October 14, 2003 01:06 AM |

As opinion - and a summary of an opinion at that.

Posted by: april on October 14, 2003 11:01 AM |

Mine's up. It's called Reality is a Religion too ...

Posted by: Subversity on October 14, 2003 11:43 AM |

My response is up here. Basically, religion ultimately has nothing to do with feminism, and no one has a right to deny someone involvement in the Women's Movement based on religion - Goddess worshipping, Islamic, or whatever else.
"There is no "feminist" religion" makes sense to me... A religion may have feminist aspects, but it cannot lay claim to all of feminism. That implies that all of us who don't follow that religion are somehow lacking in our feminism.

Posted by: megan on October 14, 2003 06:23 PM |

Interesting and varied comments. I can't tell you all how enlightening it's been - I'm really glad you had such thoughtful responses!

For my part, I have, from my earliest memories, felt more power in the word "Goddess" than the word "God". I don't buy into the idea that specifying gender makes a word less. Call me a poet or poetess - the first is more colloquial, but incorrect. The latter I would take as flattery, or accuracy, but never as meaning that I am less because I am female. I won't give anyone or anything the power of implying my gender makes me less. It makes me More. Denying the feminine form of the word plays into the hands of the oppressor. Shall I neuter myself to be taken seriously? I think not.

Posted by: Morgaine Swann on October 15, 2003 05:45 AM |

I agree with Megan on a lot of points. Also, I find that Goddess Spiritualism, which emphasizing female power, often does it in the traditional context of the power of reproduction etc. Then again I've only been to a handful of rituals, so feel free to correct!

As a side note I disagree with Morgaine on the feminine forms of words, I think changing "author" to "authoress" for "woman authors" is worse than just calling everyone "author."

Posted by: Brigitte on October 15, 2003 09:38 AM |

Morgaine,
I'm interested in seeing a link to the "offensive" article in Ms..

Elevating women above men is no better than thinking men are superior to women. It is as much of a form of supremacy as racism, heterosexism, or religious dominance. We can discuss this further in the bb if you'd like.

Posted by: Kerri on October 15, 2003 10:40 AM |

This is more of an 'all religion should keep the hell AWAY from politics' thing. Because, as an atheist, I find it very hard to see the relevance.

Posted by: the absent student on October 15, 2003 05:14 PM |

I apologize for intruding into the discussion around religion with this, but I'm intrigued by the discussion around the -ess suffix. Anyone who wants to add their thoughts on the subject is welcome to post on the board.

Posted by: april on October 16, 2003 10:21 AM |