Gender Roles in Wicca

IT'S SOAPBOX TIME! One of the most common things you'll hear about Gardnerian Wicca is that it has strict gender roles: Covens are run by a High Priestess and High Priest, and the whole affair is very cisheteronormative. But actually, there's a great deal of diversity in the way that covens in traditional Wicca approach gender roles--both in terms of practice and theology. In this video, I talk through my own perspective on gender roles in the Craft: What they mean to me, the theological and political significance I find in them, and how that affects the way I practice Wicca.
Pre-order QUEEN OF ALL WITCHERIES:
bookshop.org/p...
Check out my Tarot blog:
jackofwandstar...
Follow me on Twitter:
/ jack_of_wands
Find me on Facebook:
/ jackofwands

[@Burnside128]

As a non-binary wiccan, I think this was a really well thought of video. I just want to point out to that, even if we accept Wicca as strictly a fertility cult, that doesn't mean trans people ought to be excluded. In fact, trans people held priesthood position in a wide array of fertility cults in ancient history, because our unique experience with gender was seen as giving us a window into the mysteries that cis people often lacked

[@JackChanek]

Absolutely! In the ancient world, the priests of the Great Mother were the galloi--a caste of eunuchs who, while not easily described by 21st-century gender concepts, were certainly gender-nonconforming and not cis. The oldest surviving hymn in human history is a hymn to Inanna that praises her ability to make the male female and the female male. Transness is and has always been an important part of the Goddess, her worship, and her mysteries.

[@tristacook5510]

Given the amount of Trans Wiccan Initiates in our BTW community, we know that Transfolk are an important and integral part of our Mysteries.

[@vijnananath]

Hindu Tantra - which, I think inarguably, served as inspiration for Wicca both directly through Gardner and indirectly through occult sources like Theosophy, Anthroposophy, and Eliphas Levi - also celebrates the ability of Siva to be male, female, both, and neither. There are even old myths of Vishnu becoming impregnated after taking on a female form and having sex with Siva. It never has been binary in a lot of mystery cults.

[@Burnside128]

@@vijnananath just to expand on this, the Wiccan Descent of The Goddess myth is based on large part on the mesopotamian Descent of Innana, wherein the gods, in order to rescue Innana from the underworld, thwart the "No man or woman shall enter the underworld" clause by making a being who is neither male nor female. As thanks for rescuing her, Innana grants these beings with various magical powers, but the gods of the underworld curse them to be outcast from society, as revenge. Sure enough, we have quite a lot of evidence for people today, who we'd consider trans folk, to be in the priesthood of Innana. Further, Wiccan theology and liturgy is also just chock full of gender fuckery, if you're willing to go looking for it. My favorite example of this is the Doreen Valiente poem, Hermaphrodite-Panthea, wherein she describes the union of the God and Goddess, not just in terms of sex and fertility, but also in terms of a unified, genderless godhead, which has characteristics of both sexes. And the title of course takes this idea and likens it to the Greek deity, Hermaphroditus.

[@Burnside128]

@@vijnananath it's also worth remembering that Gardner spent much of his life in South Asia, and was very interested in the religious customs of the locals. It's not impossible that he had some degree of direct exposure to these eastern ideas as well.

[@michaelgeisenheimer7562]

Thank you for the video you are a great teacher

[@jaygrey4902]

This was so very informative- thank you!! As a seeker who also identifies as genderqueer, I've struggled before wondering where I would fit in, and even if I could fit in, within a traditional coven. This has really helped clear some things up and makes a lot of sense (side note: I also really love your video on fertility and the pagan rivival). Thank you for all your videos you put out!

[@WolfsbaneWitch]

As a trans person who is not wiccan, I appreciate the attempt to recontextualize wicca to be more inclusive... however, I feel dissatisfied with the "clergy A" and "clergy B" example, because if it truly were not based in inherent gender, then the choice of who would be part of clergy A or B would be up to equal chance, and not determined based on the gender of the one in that clergy role... but it isn't. It is instead determined by gender. "Clergy A" in this case, will traditionally always be females in a 'feminine' role. And because it is tied to inherent gender, thats why you don't typically see "Clergy A" being 50/50 male and female, because the "clergy" groups are determined by the gender=sex binary fertility aspects of wicca. Not to mention that the reasons why "clergy" A and B are taught to move energy in specific ways and why they are not split equally within these two roles, is because theyre meant to be symbolically imitating the sexual act of fertility between cishet male/female. Wicca is based in gender essentialism, so even for binary trans people, it still is not inclusive. Take the tools for instance, the wand is seen as a phallic "masculine" symbol - how does this align inclusively, and without issue, to a trans woman who has a phallus? My issue here is not that the two work in opposite but complimentary ways, because that makes sense and can be done by anyone in loads of varied contexts... I suppose the issue is that the ways they are "taught" to be complimentary are inherently tied to cisheteronormative ideas to both fertility, sex, and gender. Please correct me if I am wrong with this assumption, or if I am missing something here... I just am not fully convinced by Wiccan practices being genuinely inclusive in a structural, and ideological sense.

[@JackChanek]

This is a great question/criticism! I think the point I'm trying to make is that people talk about gender roles in Wicca as if gender were a fundamental part of how Wiccan magic works, but that's not the case. In Wicca as elsewhere, gender roles are socially conditioned norms--and that means they are open to critical interrogation. Just as with any other social context, different individuals and groups will be more or less willing to do that interrogation; Wicca isn't inherently trans-inclusive, and there are a lot of shitty transphobic covens out there. But neither is it inherently trans-exclusive, and there are a lot of covens working to dismantle cisnormative assumptions in the way they approach Wiccan ritual and symbolism. Of the covens doing that work, each has its own approach, so it's hard to generalize, and of course it's hard to talk about this without going into specifics about Gardnerian ritual. To take your example of the wand, though: I don't think the wand has to be considered a "masculine" tool. (In fact, I don't personally consider any of my magical tools gendered.) Certainly it's something that a lot of people have taught, but that gendering is a social convention and not inherent to the magic of how the wand is used. For those who want to do the work of unpacking cisnormativity and transphobia in the Craft, the goal is to ask "If I set aside socially conditioned assumptions about gender, what else does this tool/practice symbolize in this context?" That doesn't require changing the practice of the tradition; it just requires us as initiates to be open to new perspectives on the significance of what we do. This answer may not satisfy you, and if so, that's totally legit. Gardnerian Wicca, like many things coming out of the mid-20th century, emerged and developed in a social context that was in no way friendly to trans people. For those who want to approach the tradition in a genuinely trans-inclusive way, there's a lot of baggage to unpack. But I really love this tradition, and I want to invest in unpacking that baggage to the best of my ability.

[@WolfsbaneWitch]

@@JackChanek Thank you for taking the time to read and respond to my comment. It was nice learning about some of the nuances you could add to my concerns. Frankly though, I think you're a bit right, I'm not fully satisfied with your response... However I can very much appreciate your personal honesty and attempts to make Wicca a safer place for queer people. I also appreciate you taking the time to make this video to showcase that Gardinarian Wiccans don't have to be trans exclusionary. I firmly believe that if ANY form of Wicca is to "survive" the test of the modern era, it needs people (especially cishet people!) within its framework to challenge some of the old notions that may be holding the practice in social stagnation, and I'm glad that is a challenge you've seemed to accept into your practice. This is something I can feel satisfied with, and glad you have contributed to. I think this video along with your response has given me some things to think about and new perspectives to entertain (thank you for clearing up the wand thing btw, that always confused me ngl lol 😅) ... and so, a blessing for a blessing, I will leave you with some things to ponder too... You don't need to respond to em, Im just leaving em there to get your brain cogs turning on the subject a bit more: If Wiccan traditions and rituals need to be fully or partially dismantled from their original symbolic contexts and/or traditional practices in order to become trans/GNC inclusive - then doesn't that indicate the "inherent", untouched traditions of Wicca, are indeed Transphobic/exclusionary in nature? You've continuously claimed that Wicca is not "inherently" exclusionary, but in the same breath say is isn't inherently trans inclusive either... Sadly, there isn't really a middle ground on this topic. Wicca either naturally includes trans people or it doesn't. If it isn't inherently NOT transphobic, then it is, arguably, inherently transphobic in some ways, otherwise it wouldn't be possible to have a liminal nature as to its inclusivity. Additionally, in a truly inclusive tradition that has no inherent inequality issues, this some-will-be-some-wont-be inclusive idea would not be possible to sustain on grounds of tradition and symbology in the way that it can and is sustained within some Wiccan circles. I believe there is evidence to suggest that Wicca, (before/without the implementation of mindful deconstructing) is inherently gender essentialist, which by definition is transphobic. The denial of this does not help any noble attempt to decolonize Wicca from within; because if we are going to do it effectively, we need to be honest about the ugly truth of the problem in order to properly address and fix it. It is okay to admit that the practice may have been originally based in a potentially harmful cishet framework. Wicca was invented by a cishet man in the 40s/50s, its 100% okay to admit he didn't have it all right at first in regards to gender equality and nuance. No one should fault you for saying that, and that admission doesn't in any way invalidate your ability to practice what you currently do - which is the de (and re) conconstructing of that harmful narrative into something less literal, less essentialist, more fluid, and more inclusive. I believe it is completely possible to transform the framework of Wicca from exclusionary to inclusive in the way you and many other modern Wiccans are attempting to do. Afterall, the reclaiming of past oppressive structures into new inclusive ones is a VERY queer activist thing to do ( like reclaiming the Pink triangle as a queer symbol, or even reclaiming the word "queer" itself, which used to be a derogatory term) - but in order to do that most effectively we must be honest and not put illusions of denial upon ourselves in regard to the depth of the issues at hand. Furthermore, (and slightly unrelated)... is the modern attempt at reconconstructing Wicca through this nuanced context being done effectively? Namely, does it prioritize *acceptance* or *inclusivity* ? Because, simply put, letting queers in the room to practice with cis people isn't enough to call a practice not transphobic/exclusionary, the practice also requires the intentional inclusion of trans identities, experiences, and bodies, in order to be a true ally rather than a performative one. Thanks again. I'm glad I've discovered your channel, and I am interested in seeing more of your views on these complicated (and often confusing) topics. Merry meet and blessed be 🐺💗🏳️‍⚧️

[@MelieneGardner]

I absolutely agree that the roles should not be tied to biological assignment at birth so that we can be inclusive and loving of our trans and non-binary siblings. No question or issues for me personally there. However, this "mix and match" and "no specific roles" things sounds like a *fundamental* change that I'm not sure I personally agree with (and was not aware was happening). But, that seems like something for discussion with people in person at a later time. 😉

[@JackChanek]

It's worth noting that I, personally, don't view the Craft through a mix-and-match/no specific roles model. As I note in the video, it is central to my own experience of Wicca that there be two ritual roles and that women take the role of priestess, although I think the latter point is more political than magical; in my opinion there is nothing inherent about the magic of a priestess such that it can only be performed by a woman, but there are good nonmagical reasons to want covens to be run by priestesses. But other covens operate on different models, as is their right. In the 1980s, there was a well known coven in the US composed entirely of gay men. There have been other covens run by same-sex couples since, although as I noted, they bring in someone from the outside on those occasions where it's considered really important that things be done "properly" in the eyes of the wider community. Other covens feel strongly that every initiate ought to be able to perform every magical action done within the circle, and they train their people accordingly. This effectively breaks down the binary of ritual roles, even if it isn't described as such. Covens like that have existed for decades. There is and has always been an extraordinary amount of variation across covens. Yes, there are widespread commonalities, especially within subsections of the community, but the idea of homogenous practice in any aspect of the Craft is a myth, and I think we do ourselves and the tradition a disservice by clinging to it. Lots of covens do things that I don't do and wouldn't be interested in doing, but what they do is their business, not mine. My model is--and frankly, I think, can only be--live and let live.

[@MelieneGardner]

@@JackChanek I promise, I hear you, and I did note you also don't personally practice the "mix and match" version. I am also in the "live and let live" part of things, but there are people I interact with and care about who are not.

[@user-zh8pr8yi1z]

He can't go into specifics because once you look at the Wiccan Mysteries through a lens other then biological male and female (for Wicca is a fertility religion), his charade falls apart. Ian knows this which is why he is speaking in general terms. He was correct in one thing: There are things in Wicca that Ian will never truly know because of the reincarnation he was given. This is why he emphasizes 'Clergy A' and 'Clergy B'. He is trying to take a fertility religion which was sold to him as Inclusive of Everybody and change it to make it fit his mythos, rather then just joining the Minoan Brotherhood or making his own religion where he can feel comfortable in.

[@JackChanek]

Thank you for taking the time to watch my video! I've donated $100 in your name to the Transgender Legal Defense & Education Fund.

[@ArtemisNYC]

@@JackChanek BASED. 😂

[@user-zh8pr8yi1z]

@@JackChanek As a Trans person myself, I thank you. What's the address; I'll match your donation.

[@ArtemisNYC]

@@user-zh8pr8yi1z You’re a… trans person who believes in gender essentialism? Woof. Get out gurl, the transphobia is coming from inside the house.