Traditions and Identity
Oct. 30th, 2002 10:10 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
nyykiDisclaimer: This message is not aimed directly at anyone. It is also not "About" any specific incident. It is the result of some recent and not so recent incidents that have brought about thoughts on the entire topic. It is most definitely not an attack. Now, on to your regularly scheduled program...
(First, a little review)"I Am..." is a powerful statement. It is a statement of Identity -- Saying it incorporates whatever follows the "I Am" statement into the speaker's personal identity. When a person says "I am Diabetic" they define themselves in relation ot the disease. Someone who says instead "I have diabetes" or "My blood sugar levels indicate a diabetic condition" is not defining themselves by the disease, but is instead noting a single part of their self. It is difficult to find an "I Am" statement that accurately defines a person, including "I am Man" or "I am Woman."
Problems start to arise when Identity statements are used in relation to ideologies, concepts or groups. Then, any attack, real or imagined, is an attack on the individual who has tied their identity to the ideology, concept or group. (For ease of use, we'll assume that all three are concepts from now on -- inaccurate, yes, but it will save on bandwidth.)
This is dangerous. By taking something into a person's Identity to the point that they cannot see the difference between the concept and their self identity, they feel threatened when the concept is questioned. This makes the concept unquestionable, for anyone questioning the concept is "Attacking" the individuals who have taken the concept as their Identity. (America had a bad brush with this during the John Adams administration with the Alien and Sedition Acts, and still fights it today with the debate on flag burning.) Such concepts become sacred, and usually transmute into Dogma after a generation or two.
The response is often knee-jerk, hypersensitive, and non-proportional. Small slights, real or imagined, get extreme reactions. And the people reacting feel totally morally justified in their actions and incapable of seeing the viewpoint any other way.
There is an old rhyme in the Pagan Community, based on a song from Monty Python:
"Every Trad is sacred, Every Trad is Great. If a Trad is questioned, they get quite irate."
This strikes me as pretty dangerous. My tradition welcomes questions and inquiry. We understand that they bring growth -- after all, isn't this a major part of the message of the sacred Trickster? Breaking up rigid order to find new ways of doing things is not just a good Idea, it's a fundamental part of what makes humans as innovative as we are.
The most disturbing angler of this is when leaders from a tradition move swiftly and surely to quash questions or even criticism. Instead of getting a reasoned and rational discussion and explanation of the tradition's position on this, the reaction is a hellfire and brimstone response that would make a fundamentalist Baptist minister squeamish. I don't know if this is a result of the years of ego driven Witch Wars that plagued the early era of the pagan (and especially Wiccan) faith, but it will continue to keep the faith from working together as a community unless it stops. It strikes me as far more productive to teach people who don't understand the tenets of a tradition than it does to burn them, freeze them out, and try to destroy them in the community.
I don't know where the answers are to a lot of the problems we face, but I am often reminded of a saying a high School friend of mine had:
"If people were a lot less willing to take offense and a lot more willing to be honest about their feelings the world would be a much better place."
(First, a little review)"I Am..." is a powerful statement. It is a statement of Identity -- Saying it incorporates whatever follows the "I Am" statement into the speaker's personal identity. When a person says "I am Diabetic" they define themselves in relation ot the disease. Someone who says instead "I have diabetes" or "My blood sugar levels indicate a diabetic condition" is not defining themselves by the disease, but is instead noting a single part of their self. It is difficult to find an "I Am" statement that accurately defines a person, including "I am Man" or "I am Woman."
Problems start to arise when Identity statements are used in relation to ideologies, concepts or groups. Then, any attack, real or imagined, is an attack on the individual who has tied their identity to the ideology, concept or group. (For ease of use, we'll assume that all three are concepts from now on -- inaccurate, yes, but it will save on bandwidth.)
This is dangerous. By taking something into a person's Identity to the point that they cannot see the difference between the concept and their self identity, they feel threatened when the concept is questioned. This makes the concept unquestionable, for anyone questioning the concept is "Attacking" the individuals who have taken the concept as their Identity. (America had a bad brush with this during the John Adams administration with the Alien and Sedition Acts, and still fights it today with the debate on flag burning.) Such concepts become sacred, and usually transmute into Dogma after a generation or two.
The response is often knee-jerk, hypersensitive, and non-proportional. Small slights, real or imagined, get extreme reactions. And the people reacting feel totally morally justified in their actions and incapable of seeing the viewpoint any other way.
There is an old rhyme in the Pagan Community, based on a song from Monty Python:
"Every Trad is sacred, Every Trad is Great. If a Trad is questioned, they get quite irate."
This strikes me as pretty dangerous. My tradition welcomes questions and inquiry. We understand that they bring growth -- after all, isn't this a major part of the message of the sacred Trickster? Breaking up rigid order to find new ways of doing things is not just a good Idea, it's a fundamental part of what makes humans as innovative as we are.
The most disturbing angler of this is when leaders from a tradition move swiftly and surely to quash questions or even criticism. Instead of getting a reasoned and rational discussion and explanation of the tradition's position on this, the reaction is a hellfire and brimstone response that would make a fundamentalist Baptist minister squeamish. I don't know if this is a result of the years of ego driven Witch Wars that plagued the early era of the pagan (and especially Wiccan) faith, but it will continue to keep the faith from working together as a community unless it stops. It strikes me as far more productive to teach people who don't understand the tenets of a tradition than it does to burn them, freeze them out, and try to destroy them in the community.
I don't know where the answers are to a lot of the problems we face, but I am often reminded of a saying a high School friend of mine had:
"If people were a lot less willing to take offense and a lot more willing to be honest about their feelings the world would be a much better place."
