Today on Blogcritics
Home » Of Interest To Pagans

Of Interest To Pagans

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Spirit of the Thing: Against Hairsplitting in the Pagan Community

When I first got involved in Goddess worship, it was the early eighties and almost everyone there was a feminist with political leanings. Now there are a lot of different types of people involved. The hairsplitting and arguing over terminology can get out of control. Some seem to see their spirituality as an extension of a game of Dungeons and Dragons. Reproduced below is an email conversation about this I had with a fellow Wiccan. We both had some trouble on the same pagan web community.

Well Hello,

. . . When I first arrived on the site chat room I was almost immediately flamed by 2 hyper-aggressive males who screamed I could not call myself Wiccan without being Gardnerian . . . “Well Poo.” I said. “This is an open community?” I really was offended and ashamed . . . What I really like about my life choice as a Wiccan is its openness and tolerance of different ideas and approaches . . . I was really hurt and offended. . . I like the site and continue to visit it occasionally, but it does make me sad to see “our people” acting like any other screaming sectarian Christian group. Maybe people are people, i.e. assholes, but I hope we can be better than that. Apparently not.

Blest Be
Tanya

_________________

Dear Tanya,

Unfortunately, there’s a lot of silly hairsplitting and nit-picking in the neo pagan community in general. That’s not what it is supposed to be about. It’s a shame that it went to that level of animosity. I can only figure young males hyped up on Pepsi and violent computer games, thinking they were having an argument on who was the best captain of the Enterprise or some other matter of life and death. [For the record, female Wiccans are just as guilty of hairsplitting.] I’m from the feminist school who had political reasons for getting into this. I can’t help but think that a religion without a guiding spirit degenerates into an elaborate game. There’s a lot of silliness about the term Wicca in particular. It doesn’t appear to be about anything important. I mean if evil people were doing quite bad things in its name, that would be important, but that’s not what is bothering them. Wicca is becoming a term for modern paganism in the European tradition, i.e. modern day witchcraft. There’s really nothing wrong with that. We need a broadly understood term without some of the negative associations of the older terms.

Modern-day paganism is about love, honoring the female, the Goddess, the earth, our bodies and the possibilities of life on earth. It doesn’t matter how you do it, as long as you don’t harm people, animals or the earth, you have reverence, and your heart is in the right place. It doesn’t matter what you call it, how many candles you light, or which Gods you call on. It’s a calling to worship, not a computer game.

Cerulean

My correspondant’s email is reproduced with her permission.
If you are not pagan, please refrain from making hateful comments. Thanks.
Pub: NB

Powered by

About Cerulean

  • http://w6daily.winn.com/ Phillip Winn

    Thanks for this. I think this helps to demonstrate a belief of mine: that any group that involves two or more people will eventually encounter conflict of a sublimely ridiculous nature.

    That’s right, any group of two or more. And yeah, that includes any couple.

    It doesn’t matter what the reason for the group is, it just happens. People are odd.

  • Eric Olsen

    it’s called internecine warfare and is often th emost vicious of all

  • http://selfaudit.blogspot.com Aaman

    A question – is Wiccanism syncretic? As in, does it attempt to reconcile disparate and opposing beliefs. In which case, it could be a valid form of dialog with the fundamentalists of all stripes.

    Also, I wonder if is correlated with the early Ashera worshippers, but that’s another story…

  • Eric Olsen

    why do deities have to have genders at all? Seems beneath them

  • http://www.kissingstrangers.com/ Kissing Bandit

    “any group that involves two or more people will eventually encounter conflict of a sublimely ridiculous nature.”

    Er…any group of one (i.e. the individual) will eventually encounter conflict of a sublimely ridiculous nature – adding another person (or people) is simply asking for trouble.

    Each individual person needs to ‘get it together’ for themself before they can ‘get it together’ as a group and that is the nature of growth…

  • http://w6daily.winn.com/ Phillip Winn

    KB, conflict with what? I think most conflicts involve differences of opinion. If someone has a difference of opinion with himself or herself, well, I’d say that’s somewhat unusual.

    Put another way, most “conflicts” remain unnoticed until a second person becomes involved.

  • http://selfaudit.blogspot.com Aaman

    Gerald Gardner correlated Wiccanism and ancient religions, IMHO

    He posited that Wiccanism was a re-emergence of the ancient matriachal religions, which is why I ask my sub-question of comment #3

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    >>A question – is Wiccanism syncretic? As in, does it attempt to reconcile disparate and opposing beliefs. In which case, it could be a valid form of dialog with the fundamentalists of all stripes.<<

    Calling Wicca syncretic is being generous. It’s completely fictitious, made up of fairycake and wish-icing. Not that I have anything against made-up religions, but as a historian I find the claims of some Wiccans to an unbroken tradition going back to ancient times totally offensive. There’s no real evidence to support the theory of a matriarchal pagan survival – except in things like the Cult of Mary inside the Catholic Church. Worship any way you like, but don’t sell your religion based on lies.

    Gerald Gardner is a self-serving opportunist, IMHO.

    Dave

  • http://www.pippensqueak.blogspot gypsyman

    Like native spirituality in North A merica, or any survival based series of beliefs, Wicca,pagenism, or whatever you want to call it, derives from the practices and beliefs of early British isle agrarian peoples.

    The holidays and celebrations all coincide with si gnificant days in the cycle of a year. Harvest, planting, midwinter, midsummer, etc.

    As far as organised religions go most of these beliefs are probably derived from drudic practices of the early celts. These practices carry over in rural communities in Britain in the form of things like May Day, and dancing around the may pole.

    Halloween is part of that tradition, but has obviously been far removed from its former celebration marking the end of the harvest, and the death of a year.

    I don’t agree with David that goddess worship is “made up” as there have been too many pre christian artifacts dug up indicating the contrary. I believe that the Christian church adappted certain common rituals and beliefs into their cerimonies to make it more palatable for their rural parishoners.

    But I do agree with David in his assesment of Gardiner, and the majority of what people call Wicca today. I doubt if the people of 2nd century Britain reffered to themselves as Wicca or any paticular brand.

    Just as Natives had no name for what they did, neither did any one else until the codification of religions began with Judaism.

    That’s enough for now.

    gypsyman

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    >>I don’t agree with David that goddess worship is “made up” as there have been too many pre christian artifacts dug up indicating the contrary. I believe that the Christian church adappted certain common rituals and beliefs into their cerimonies to make it more palatable for their rural parishoners.<<

    It’s made up in the sense that it’s a modern reinterpretation of ancient pagan beliefs which the pagans who originally practiced them would hardly recognize. One of my big objections when it comes to Wicca is how utterly modern the basic concept of the religion is. It’s taken the meat and bones out of the pagan sources and kept only the watered down, modernized ‘philosophical’ elements, and a lot of them are basically made up, or heavily modified from the sources it claims to descend from. On the one hand Wicca wants very much to appeal to a modern audience, but at the same time it claims ancient antecedents which are fundamentally at odds with its revisionist character. I can’t find much to respect in that.

    Dave

  • Eric Olsen

    it’s digital photographs of Stonehenge

  • Sandra

    Dave, all of the Wiccans I know (in person and online) have long since discarded the “one unbroken tradition” line, if they ever believed it in the first place. That claim came primarily from Margaret Murray’s work which was accepted by some scholars from fairly early in the last century until rather recently. It has now been largely discredited, and most Wiccans today describe their religion as reconstructionist rather than authentically ancient.

    It seems that your primary objection to Wicca is in regards to a claim that most Wiccans don’t make – a strawman argument, if you will.

    Personally, I agree with you that Gerald Gardner was a self-serving opportunist, as well as a liar and a forger (not unlike Joseph Smith). However, that doesn’t mean the religion that grew out of his little movement is invalid. :)

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Glad to hear it, Sandra. Most Wiccans I’ve encountered have held fiercely to the Margaret Murray tradition, but it’s been some years since I hung out actively with a lot of Wiccans.

    If you acknowledge that Wicca is largely a modern construct designed wich essentially reimagines paganism I’ve got no quibble with it.

    The basic principles of the religion are laudable unless you get involved in the intensely anti-male variation.

    Dave

  • http://blogcritics.org/author.php?author=Cerulean Cerulean

    I was pleasantly surprised to find an intelligent discussion here.

    To respond to Aaman’s point, I think that syncretism is common enough among neo-pagan believers. You may have meant to wonder if Wicca itself is syncretism which it might not be but I think the larger point is that people on this path mix and match a lot and there’s nothing wrong with that. Early Ashera worshipers are on the same path basically as Wiccans. It’s the same Goddess in many guises.

    “Why do deities have to have genders at all? Seems beneath them”–Eric Olsen

    I believe that that’s their nature and some of them are pretty randy. Nearly every culture has myths and legends about that.

    “If someone has a difference of opinion with himself or herself, well, I’d say that’s somewhat unusual.”–Phillip Winn

    Yet it’s happened to me.

    I’ve responded to Dave’s points before. I feel a reductionist, hostile, spirit behind them. As one commenter observed, his are also strawman agruments. There’s a larger spirit to Goddess worship which is consistent through millenia. Some traditions have survived from earlier times, while others have been reconstructed. I think that focusing on side issues like whether a particular set of teachings has been handed down completely intact for a thousand years is beside the point, frankly. A religion is a set of spiritual beliefs first. Emerging from the underground as it did, neo-paganism went through many stages and will go through many more. In some cases, it had to be reconstructed from people’s subconsciouses or through Divine Visitation. It’s a religion, not a geneology. Catholics make a lot of claims themselves about ancient holy relics but that is not the core of that faith. When someone repeatedly makes the same false arguments, I would say that there is something else going on.

    Thanks for the discussion.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    I agree that the spiritual aspect is most important, But a big element of any religion is community, and community has to be built around honesty.

    From your last comment it sure sounds like you’re one of those who supports the ‘thousand year tradition’ you refer to, along with the ‘emerging from the underground’. Surely one of the values of Wicca is truth – yet how can it be taken seriously and how can you build a community of worshippers, when you start out from the transparent lie of an ancient religion that went underground and then reemerged, which just isn’t supported by any facts whatsoever.

    Dave

  • http://blogcritics.org/author.php?author=Cerulean Cerulean

    Dave, I think you should give this a rest. We’ve all heard it and no one agrees with you. Several people here have joined me in poking holes in your statements. You are obviously not concerned about the spiritual welfare of pagans, either. I remember your comments about eating puppies and other forms of savagery, so I don’t see you being so sensitive as to worry about the purity of our religion. Pagans would not, as you did, sexually harass Christina Ricci when she came to our site. (If I remember correctly) If that wasn’t you I apologize but I think it was.

    Please agree to disagree.

  • http://www.pippensqueak.blogspot gypsyman

    I’m constatnly shocked and sickened by what people have done to ancient practices in the name of new age spirtuality. Most “new age” are just old ways where people have taken the bits they like and ignored many core beliefs.

    I’d really like to know how many people who say they are wicca have anything to do with farming, or who claim to follow any traditional path live the lives that gave birth to those practices.

    There are, as Dave so rightly points out, core values that are important in any tradition. They are what is important. Isn’t that what a spiritual belief is all about anyway, a value system to live your life by?

    Ritual is a serious of actions designed to bring about a specific result. The idea of people trying to perform what were harvest rituals while living in the city is ludicrous.

    I know a person who pretty much goes through a different set of practices as his mood swings; Wicca, Buddhism, and now he’s into angels. People like him are missing the point when it comes to faith and spiritual practice.

    They shouldn’t be about making you feel better about yourself, but about how you can be a better person in this world.

    Maybe I’m really conservative, I don’t know,(I’m sure conservatives would laugh themselves silly at that notion)but reinterprating a religion for your own convieniance is insulting and a lie.

    This isn’t addressed at anyone in particular, so please no one take offence, rather it’s just a pet peeve of mine. Thanks for letting me run off at the mouth.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    >>Dave, I think you should give this a rest. We’ve all heard it and no one agrees with you. Several people here have joined me in poking holes in your statements.< <

    Odd, I've seen several people agreeing with me.

    >> You are obviously not concerned about the spiritual welfare of pagans, either.< <

    That's true, since I'm not big on spiritual anything. But I do think about their mental and emotional health.

    >> I remember your comments about eating puppies and other forms of savagery,< <

    Excuse me? Your memory leaves something to be desired. When did I say anything about eating puppies. I certainly can't imagine saying anything like that except possibly in jest.

    >> so I don’t see you being so sensitive as to worry about the purity of our religion.< <

    I trained as a medieval historian, specialized in the history of the medieval mysteries and the history of cults and secret organizations and spent a couple of years as a teaching assistant in a class on the history of witchcraft. Then I taught history myself for almost 20 years.

    You're right, I don't much care one way or the other about the religion itself. In that area I'm for whatever makes people happy and leads them to lead better lives. But I am personally offended by the perversion of history. There is enough about the past which is unclear to us. To distort our image of the past with a campaign of deliberate misrepresentation of facts which we do actually know is a crime IMO.

    >>Pagans would not, as you did, sexually harass Christina Ricci when she came to our site. (If I remember correctly) If that wasn’t you I apologize but I think it was. <<

    Perhaps rather than apologizing in advance when you make a statement like this you should go back and read that thread before looking like an extremely rude pagan. Surely a good pagan would not throw out slurs and accusations without checking their accuracy first. In fact, it’s rather like sexual harassment. The fact that you apologized in advance suggests that you had doubts about the accuracy of your statement, yet you made it anyway. What does that say about you?

    Dave

  • gonzo marx

    ummm…puppies and complimentary comments about Ms Ricci’s appearance are all mine…Mr Nalle doesn’t have anywhere near my twisted sense of Humor…obviously , neither do you, Cerulean…

    no worries…

    however, Ms Ricci did not find my comments “harrassment” in any form, she got the “joke”, Adam even ran with it later in the thread…you are the only one to have even thought of it that way , to my knowledge…

    as to the topic of this Thread, an earlier commenter hit my thoughts pretty closely when comparing many sects of neo-paganism to Joseph Smith and the Mormons

    i feel much the same about both..if it is working to help enrich your life, i’m all for it

    however, history shows that founding a faith or philosophy on the false assertations of con-men can be detrimental down the line..in many ways

    “divine visitation”….now there’s one i am not going to touch , since i don’t want to offend this early in the morning

    but i will say i do remain skeptical of such assertation, whether it comes from Saul of Tarsus or the homeless man on the corner channeling Temujin…

    nuff said?

    Excelsior!

  • Eric Olsen

    I request that no hateful things be said about my hateful things, such as they are

  • gonzo marx

    i hate when you do that, Eric

    {8^P~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Excelsior!

  • Nancy

    Dave, your comment #8 got me laughing; I needed the humor, but I don’t think you intended it: “it [Wicca] is completely fictitious…” And christianity, islam, and every other religion isn’t? Not one religion ever existed wasn’t a load of “fairycake & wish-icing” (what a lovely euphamism for BS), its founding data heavily loaded with mythologies & ‘traditions’ stolen from anywhere & everywhere, and as a historian you should know that better than most. Some religions are more completely fictitious than others – or at least, are more extensively documented AS fiction, like Mormonism, Scientology, & the Unification church, but modern-day christianity (especially the catholic/orthodox brand) is also almost 100% fiction & “fairycake”. Hinduism & Shinto can’t be referred to any kind of reality whatsoever; and Buddhism, while containing a few nuggets of probably historical fact, is also well larded with fairytales & cobwebs. Judaism contains more “documented” historical bits, but it also is mainly tradition, taboos, & a good deal of ancient semitic propaganda. BTW, I like that term, ‘fairycake’. It’s quite poetic – o/s imagery – & I intend to steal it freely in future. ;)

    Sooo…since ALL religions are ‘fairycake’, what’s wrong w/people doing Wicca who live in cities? Modern Jews & Muslims don’t exactly participate in nomadic herding lifestyles anymore, but that doesn’t keep them from carrying out rituals/religious traditions rooted therein.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Agreed on religions in general being happy-feeling fantasies, Nancy. I just thought that bringing in that broader topic was not relevant to the discussion of Wicca.

    Gonzo has a point on Moromonism – it’s a good comparison. So is Seventh Day Adventism. But to be fair I think Wicca has a more positive message and is less cult-like than either of those groups.

    Dave

  • Jen

    Cerulean,
    I can see where you might be getting frustrated with Dave’s comments if you’ve been reading this thread in parcels, but when you come in later and read the full string in order there’s really nothing particularly offensive or illogical in his argument. And, as someone who’s identified herself as pagan, witch, and community leader for over a decade, I’m not offended at all, nor do I particularly disagree with his argument. Please be careful when you claim to speak for all pagans- with our differing views that’s never a good idea. ;)

    There is a definite importance to honoring as much fact as we can find in history. There is also an importance that neo-pagans identify themselves as such and take credit for their own creativity in their path to communing with the divine.

    Do we take some cues from what can be reconstructed from the past? Yes. Can we guess at the celebrations around the harvest festivals based on agricultural practice? Yes. Do we know that Midwinter was actually a time of inner reflection for the ancients as we interpret it now? No. They were probably more worried about scrounging for heat sources and food during the minimal daylight hours than worrying about their goals for the new year. Can we know for certain that the old religions revered the moon? No. Maybe the full moon merely acted as a reliable calendar for them and that’s why we see representations of the lunar cycle. Since we can’t go back in time and ask, we’ll never know.

    So take pride in the creativity and adaptability of the pagan religions. As a group we have strong ethics, and open minds that allow our faiths to be adaptable – a trait that will keep it alive far longer than the structured and rigid faiths out there.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    >>Can we know for certain that the old religions revered the moon? No.<<

    Oh, I don’t know on that one. The evidence from Greek and especially Babylonian mythology is pretty substantial – there’s almost no goddess more influential or widely syncretized than Ishtar. The argument for a strong lunar tradition in western Europe is much weaker, though.

    Dave

  • http://calblog.com Justene

    I often agree with Dave and do in this thread.

    It’s unclear to me why it’s ok for Cerulean to refer to Gardnerians as “young males hyped up on Pepsi and violent computer games, thinking they were having an argument on who was the best captain of the Enterprise or some other matter of life and death” and then insist that no one post comments against her beliefs.

    I am Catholic. I believe in transubstantiation. I’ve never found the derisive laughter of my secular friends to be offensive.

  • http://selfaudit.blogspot.com Aaman

    Beam me up too, Scotty

  • gonzo marx

    sorry, Aaman .. but Scotty is dead … gone to join the Choir Invisible … not passed out, but passed on … off to Engineering Heaven…

    some one else will have to fix the damned dilithium crystals and switch the transporters to channel B

    and our tiny little mudball is slightly drearier because of it

    Excelsior!

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Well, now Scotty actually has someplace to beam us up to.

    Dave

  • http://blogcritics.org/author.php?author=Cerulean Cerulean

    Gonzo, Christina Ricci said “Eeuuuw” when you sexually harassed her and stopped coming here.

    Thanks for your intelligent comments, Nancy.

    Dave, the thread was expunged so I could not check it. I had thought it was the two of you saying stuff like that but if not, then I apologize. You did make a comment about eating puppies and more like it. I didn’t find it amusing. It’s on my “Witchcraft vs. Catholicism Part II” thread. First comment.

    Jen, I don’t quite know how to respond to not knowing if earlier pagans worshipped the moon. Otherwise, I would agree with your points about adaptability although your friend Dave would seem not to.

    Gypsyman you have some particular opinions. If we disallowed all religious festivals and customs carried over from a more rural existence, that would leave almost none. Any person can use any religion for any purpose. Look at televangelists or bigamous Mormon cult leaders. Any trendy spiritual belief attracts a variety of people and there’s a lot of selfish people out there. I feel that many people reaching back to Wiccan teachings however are trying to connect to the Earth and that that’s positive. I don’t agree that the mix and match aspect of modern spiritual practices is the problem. For one thing, those will never be people who hijack planes or refuse to leave the settlements in Israel. It’s the spirit of the thing, is it about love, communing with the God of your understanding, and trying to live the best life you can? Some people who mix and match are trying to do that and some who belong to strict old line religions are molesting children or stealing from the church fund.

    Justene you misunderstood. I didn’t make any particular comments against Gardnerians but against hairsplitting. In this case the hairsplitters happened to be agressive young males, who are not uncommon on the internet. In general hairsplitting among pagans is done equally by both genders as I noted. I thought of editing my comment about those guys out to avoid having a side issue.

    I’m sorry to anyone whose sensibilties might have been offended by that comment but there’s a lot of those guys all over the internet. I’d be glad to stop writing about them if I stopped encountering them.

    Well this discussion started pretty well and then it turned into get me, or is that just how it seems? I saw people disagreeing with Dave and now they agree and more come in besides. OK then. Well, thanks Nancy.

  • gonzo marx

    correction Cerulean..the “ewwwww” was for the drool bucket comment, and both she and Adam posted after that comment

    but, whatever…

    think of me as ya like, i take full Responsibility for what i type…

    i’ll leave the judgemental self righteous bullshit to others…

    {8^P~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    have a sooOOooooper day

    Excelsior!

  • http://blogcritics.org/author.php?author=Cerulean Cerulean

    He kept coming back and she did not. Nice try.

    I’m sure that it would be convenient for you if this issue would be dismissed as bullshit, however unlikely.

  • http://hungrytroll.com troll

    -Gonzo, Christina Ricci said “Eeuuuw” when you sexually harassed her and stopped coming here.-

    I’ve been under here for a while and ya know –

    Ricci and company came to this site thru google to contest a – perhaps – libelous article that you posted

    and now you say Gonzo chased her off with his raunchy comments

    very tastee – take your distorting self off my bridge

    troll

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    >>Dave, the thread was expunged so I could not check it. I had thought it was the two of you saying stuff like that but if not, then I apologize. You did make a comment about eating puppies and more like it. I didn’t find it amusing. It’s on my “Witchcraft vs. Catholicism Part II” thread. First comment.<<

    That comment was humorous in the context of your initial posting, which brought up the silly 100,000 puppies in pagan heaven idea. You seem to run into a lot of trouble because you make these posts which are supposed to be funny, but you have no actual sense of humor when it comes to people responding to you. Something to consider.

    And BTW, people do eat puppies. Most of those who do are pagans, though I bet none are Wiccans..

    Dave

  • http://blogcritics.org/author.php?author=Cerulean Cerulean

    Dave, it was a humorous article of mine that you were responding to with that comment, and one enjoyed by thousands of people. Nothing wrong with my humor just because I don’t like sick stuff that you post to be sick. You enjoy feeding off people’s outrage, especially women. It’s sad. Can’t you generate enough interest in your own postings to suit you?

    Thank you for making my point that you are not sensitive enough to have a sincere interest in advising pagans on how to conduct their religion. I was just going to email you to try to clear up the certain comments I made about you here and possibly delete them. In fact I just copied your email address to do that, when I saw this posting. Maybe this is just God’s way of telling me to forget it cause it’s hard to care when you post shit like that.

  • gonzo marx

    convenient?

    ok..now i laughed…

    thanks

    Excelsior!

  • Bennett

    troll – #33 – dead nuts on.

  • http://www.morethings.com Al Barger

    Cerulean, your hypocrisy does not impress me here, particularly since it is an especially harsh hypocrisy.

    For starters, you go on even in the original post cluck-clucking about not wanting people to make “hateful comments.” Then you come in accusing Gonzo of “sexual harassment.” That’s pretty goddam hateful of YOU.

    Besides which, it’s so utterly baseless. Gonzo is in no position to “sexually harass” a rich celebrity that he’s never even met.

    Besides which, as has been pointed out, that it was YOUR arguably hateful comments about her boyfriend that Miss Ricci was here objecting too.

    It’s bad enough when you make baseless accusations against strangers. I would hope that the Goldberg incident would have made that point clear to you.

    But it’s much worse when you make ugly baseless comments like this within the family. Gonzo is a fine upstanding contributor to the Blogcritics community, and you owe him an apology.

    It’s obvious from your writing that you have issues with men. Fine. We’ve all got issues.

    It’s NOT fine to take your problems out by falsely accusing brother Blogcritics of wickedness.

    Are you going to make amends to Gonzo, or does your made up goddess say that bearing false witness against your neighbor is ok?

  • gonzo marx

    oh big Al..you really do care…

    /sniffles

    but no worries, Cerulean is certanily welcome to her opinion of me..and i require less than nothing from her…

    not all “jests” are taken well by everyone, nor are all of them understood

    after all…

    your mileage may vary

    Excelsior!

  • http://www.morethings.com Al Barger

    Come on Gonzo, give me a little kiss baby.

    XOX

  • gonzo marx

    you brute..well…only if you wear the chiffon tutu…and shave yer back

    Excelsior!

  • Jewels

    WELL, this was a fun little romp! Started out talking wicca and paganism and LOOK! Guys shaving backs, wearing tutu’s and oooohhh Kisses! Very fun.
    Read this article as had family members of the wiccan circles. Nobody wore tutu’s or shaved their backs. More like looking into glasses of water to see the future and, yeah, moondancing. Can’t keep the pic of the tutu’s out of my mind. Thanks.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    >>Dave, it was a humorous article of mine that you were responding to with that comment, and one enjoyed by thousands of people. Nothing wrong with my humor just because I don’t like sick stuff that you post to be sick. < <

    Sick humor? People DO eat puppies. Take it up with some Koreans. How can you even exist in the blogosphere when you're so hypersensitive and can't take even the smallest joke?

    >>You enjoy feeding off people’s outrage, especially women.< <

    Where on earth do you get that idea? I've never said a single sexist word on BC, never said anything specifically offensive to women, and the puppy comment had nothing to do with women either. You're paranoid and delusional. Plus my comments are generally not sensationalistic of offensive.

    >> It’s sad. Can’t you generate enough interest in your own postings to suit you? <<

    So, you think we should be limited to commenting on our own writing? I’m sure that would suit your desire for censorship, but it’s not the way it works here on BC.

    Dave

  • http://www.morethings.com Al Barger

    You’re most welcome Jewels. Gonzo Marx and I are but your humble comic servants, eager to serve your entertainment needs.

    Similarly, perhaps you would enjoy this vintage number from the archives.

  • http://none.com Bob A. Booey

    You should all be sterilized.

    I hope you’re all typing this on laptops placed directly over your genitals.

    That is all.

  • http://www.kissingstrangers.com/ Kissing Bandit

    KB, conflict with what? I think most conflicts involve differences of opinion. If someone has a difference of opinion with himself or herself, well, I’d say that’s somewhat unusual.

    It’s called inner conflict. Sorry it’s taken me so long to find this thread again.

    Each individual has some level of inner conflict with their core self – ego and higher self – call it what you will, it is still conflict :)…that is all I meant by the statement.