It was not my intention to do a second posting on woman born woman events, but last week the controversy flared up again at Pantheacon, the largest gathering of Pagans on the West Coast. To give you an idea just how big this is, 205 workshops and events were scheduled from Friday afternoon to Monday afternoon, and that included leaving 3 hours free each day for food.
The controversy arose when a transgender woman wanted to participate in a ritual put on by a Dianic group. Dianic circles are for “women born women only” but, in this case, although notice was posted that there would be some ritual nudity, nothing was posted about it being for women born women only or even about it being just for women. The transgender woman was turned away at the door.
Let me be clear, I wasn’t there and had nothing to do with the ritual. Clearly, if the organizers were going to limit participation to a certain group, that should have been advertised. I got involved 24 hours later when a friend told me she overheard people talking about doing a panel on the incident and making sure there would be a lot of people there. I went to the office of the program committee and said I would like to be on the panel, which I discovered had been labeled “Gender Discrimination.” I said my doctoral research was on the shaping of gender from a sociological perspective and I thought those insights could be of use in the discussion. In addition, I am in a Dianic circle. The person in the office told me she would get in touch with the people putting on the panel and would get back to me. She called me within a half hour and said they were willing to have me on the panel. Ruth Barrett, well known Dianic Elder and teacher, also decided to attend.
I put off the 7 hour drive home to attend. Instead of a panel, we sat in a circle and whoever had the talking stick could speak. The organizer, the individual who had been refused entry, began, and was very generous in allowing me ample time. I spoke about childhood gender socialization and how our life experiences teach us how to interpret our biological experiences, how it is a complex, dynamic interplay of factors that shapes our gender identity.
I must say I was taken aback at how most of the people there saw the issue as one of simple discrimination. Then I learned that the people who had refused entry to the transgender woman had not even been notified that this discussion was going to take place. Of course, as I pointed out, labeling the discussion as one on gender discrimination biased the event from the start. The language we use frames the discussion. Had it been called “Gender Discrimination vs. Religious Freedom,” there might have been both a very different crowd and discussion. And as there was a letter being circulated attempting to ban women born women events from future Pantheacons, the issue could be experienced as such. As it was, and had my friend not accidentally overheard a conversation, no one would have been there to present an alternate viewpoint.
Almost everyone spoke. Some of them told horrific stories of their lives as transgender individuals, of pain and abuse that no living creature should ever have to experience. I wasn’t the only person with tears as we listened to their stories. We heard of multiple rapes, of desperation and of self-hatred. The wounds are deep and lasting.
And yet they are not the same wounds or the same self-hatred that people in female bodies experience when brought up in a male-dominated culture. The internalized misogyny, the shame in the natural functions of the female body, the unconscious giving way to male privilege and the expectations for self as Other are painfully unique. The Dianic tradition is an embodied one. These are embodied experiences. When we speak about the “blood mysteries” we are speaking not only of our biological functions – menstruation, birth, menopause – but also about what it means to grow up and live in female bodies in a male-dominated society where gender matters.
Gender is so terribly important in our world, that some people are willing mutilate their bodies and spend large amounts of money to make their bodies fit what is in their hearts and heads. If gender didn’t matter, there wouldn’t be transsexuals. And, ironically, there wouldn’t be a need for the Dianic tradition.
Ms. Griffin,
I ask you to please read (or re-read) my thoughts and Sarah’s thoughts on our actions at Pantheacon:
http://worthyadvisor.wordpress.com/2011/02/22/breaking-the-walls-of-gender-pantheacon-2011/
and
http://cerridwen.st4r.org/wiki/index.php/Pantheacon_2011
I would like to clarify a few things that you have brought up here and in other places:
1) Our actions were planned in advance of Pantheacon. The discussion itself wasn’t *because* of the Lilith ritual, but it did end up influenced by it in the end. Sarah and I didn’t find out about the whole incident until just before we were approached by the Programming staff on Sunday at lunchtime. Neither of us were in attendance at this ritual, as we were both at other events.
2) As we only got offered the ballroom at Sunday lunchtime, we had less than 24 hours to plan and get the word out. There was a great deal of work that needed to be done, and we felt that we had gotten the word out as much as we possibly could. As it was so last minute, we weren’t sure who was going to show. We posted flyers and used Twitter to spread it around as much as we could. The programming people put the change of program in the bulletin and on the change board.
3) When the programming staff contacted us about you wanting to be at our discussion, we immediately said yes, but we did tell them that it wasn’t going to be a panel, as such, but that we would make sure that you had time to speak. If they didn’t communicate that to you when they called you back, my apologies. We also told the same thing to the woman who asked if she could tell you about the discussion (I can’t remember her name off the top of my head).
Our aim was to open up the discussion of gender and transgender discrimination, which is what we succeeded in doing. We are both glad that you and Ruth showed up so that you could voice your thoughts and feelings about this very difficult issue. Without your involvement in the discussion, the community cannot move forward to reach some sort of solution that allows you your freedom of expression, yet reduces harm to the community.
Again, please re-read our essays about the discussion, or better yet, feel free to email either of us to discuss this further.
Thank you,
Gina Pond
Gina, Thank you for the clarification. It is good to know exactly what happened and not have to piece it together from other posts of people who were not directly involved. As someone who was a political activist for years, I will admit to some admiration for your organizing tactics. It isn’t the way I would do it now, at my age, but I probably would have 40 years ago.
I have read both posts you mention and find them informative, respectful of everyone, and frankly positive in an attempt to deal with a very complex issue. Although we disagree in a few areas, I appreciated the generous and respectful way I was allowed time to speak and present an alternate perspective at the discussion. You thanked us that morning and I knew then you were being sincere. I also appreciate the constructive tone of your posting – especially after some of the ugliness (on both sides) that has gone electronic.
But I understand the whole Monday discussion was taped and will be posted online. I do have concerns about that for several reasons. I was never informed, much less asked permission to be taped. As I was one of the early arrivals, I assume the majority of attendees were not aware either. I suspect that I am not the only individual who revealed personal things about her past that I would rather not see online for all of eternity. I hope you and Sarah will agree with me this this was highly inappropriate.
By the way. Please address me as Wendy. I am Dr. Griffin in the classroom, just Wendy everywhere else.
Thank you. We will discuss the matter of the recording with the PNC Bay Area people.
> And yet they are not the same wounds or the same self-hatred that people in female bodies experience when brought up in a male-dominated culture. The internalized misogyny, the shame in the natural functions of the female body, the unconscious giving way to male privilege and the expectations for self as Other are painfully unique. The Dianic tradition is an embodied one. These are embodied experiences. When we speak about the “blood mysteries” we are speaking not only of our biological functions – menstruation, birth, menopause – but also about what it means to grow up and live in female bodies in a male-dominated society where gender matters.
I agree with the first sentence of this strongly. On the other hand, I don’t agree that there is a unitary experience connected to growing up in a female body. I honestly don’t relate that strongly to the way most Dianic practitioners and writers approach their bodies, and it bothers me to be included under the label “women-born-women” when most rituals performed under that title are alienating to me and based on experiences (especially of shame and powerlessness) that I don’t share. My adolescence took place in the 1990s, and although I recognize some similarities with the experiences of second-wave feminist writers, in general the more fluid model of gender used in queer studies more accurately reflects my experience. I think a great deal of that has to do with the historical moment in which I became an adult. Although I agree that there are power dynamics between “men” and “women” that still need to be addressed, I increasingly find those categories to be overly broad and to actually obscure the power dynamics that operate most powerfully in my communities. I know that I have been lucky to live in moderate to liberal parts of the country, and that there are many places in the world where second-wave feminism still makes a great deal of sense. But in my community, its models of gender are reductive and divisive.
i agree that gender is complex, and that transgender people have a different experience of gender than cisgendered people. But the gender experiences of cisgendered people are also diverse. The fact that I would be unproblematically admitted to a ritual for “women-born-women,” but would feel intensely uncomfortable and alienated there in a way that I’m not at an event that’s celebratory of queerness, suggests to me that there’s something flawed about the entire idea of “women-born-women.” It would make me a great deal more comfortable continuing to identify as a feminist if those speaking for feminist traditions would refrain from assuming that their understanding of genetically female bodies is universal to those who have them, and that any other understanding is a sign of false consciousness or self-hatred.
Whether it is appropriate to exclude people — transpeople, or cisgendered men and women — from official events at Pantheacon, when Pantheacon has begun to operate as a kind of Pagan public square, seems to me to be a separate issue. I support religious groups including and excluding whoever they like and practicing however they like in private spaces, but it’s not clear to me that providing such private spaces is the best mission for large conferences.
Thank you for your long and thoughtful reply, Christina. I hope my thoughts weren’t taken as implying universals, as I do know that there are differences based on generation, race, class, nationality, culture, etc. As I wrote in an earlier post, I grew up around strong, competent women and delighted (and still delight) in being female.
But every semester here in liberal California I encounter young female students who are survivors of rape, incest, battering and other forms of typically male violence directed toward individuals in female bodies. They don’t “get” queer studies and don’t see gender as fluid. They are in pain because they are female in a male-dominated world.
The Dianic Craft has never pretended to be for all women. Clearly, it isn’t for you. But is does offer healing space for some women. And some of us Second Wave Elders do believe we have an obligation to help those who come after us.
As for arguing disagreement is a sign of false consciousness, I agree. The tactic is both dismissive and offensive. And as a Dianic, I was appalled at what the person identifying herself as Z wrote. It was not only very ugly but completely off-point.