![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
haptalaonWelcome to Part II. This post offers some suggestions for how design the spiritual framework for what a group does to insulate it against future problems.
Success mode: Set things up so leaving the coven is as straightforward as leaving your board games group – you take your games home with you, and that’s the end of it. (Maybe you just got really into chess and can’t stand another game of Settlers of bloody Catan, but that’s OK because we’re all still friends and there are lots of chess clubs!)
Abuse generally occurs when the abus-ee is materially disadvantaged – when there’s a reason they can’t just leave. This can be a spouse who lacks financial means, or a junior employee reliant on a particularly well-connected boss, or a child dependent on a parent, etc. Modern witchcraft is more fortunate than historic, in that the idea of solitary craft is well established & supported – I think it would be easier to leave a coven now than historically.
I’ll come back to this one in the post about Clergy.
(Most of the problems I experienced with the queer community grew out of underlying ideology which was flawed, or poorly applied, or grossly misued.
i.e. “Here are some problems with cultural monogamy” turning into “your monogamous relationship is politically problematic because it means we can’t fuck”; “Here are some problems with masculinity in our society” turning into “When you say you have a boyfriend, what I hear is he’s oppressing you and I need to liberate you into a relationship with me instead” or “rape is a tool of patriarchy used by cisgender men; the rules don’t apply to me because wlw/trans men/non binary people don’t count” etc etc etc etc.
There’s nothing worse than someone putting a noble idea to use as a tool for gaining personal power; it’s coarsening and destructive and very ugly. It takes root. It cuts you off from things you need for survival.)
Reduce material risks associated with leaving or dissent
Failure mode: “if you are excommunicated, you are cursed and then you go to hell, and no one from the congregation can speak to you again at risk of their souls too, and you cannot have contact with your children any more, and you have to leave our isolated rural community and be among the sinful folk of the cities.”Success mode: Set things up so leaving the coven is as straightforward as leaving your board games group – you take your games home with you, and that’s the end of it. (Maybe you just got really into chess and can’t stand another game of Settlers of bloody Catan, but that’s OK because we’re all still friends and there are lots of chess clubs!)
Abuse generally occurs when the abus-ee is materially disadvantaged – when there’s a reason they can’t just leave. This can be a spouse who lacks financial means, or a junior employee reliant on a particularly well-connected boss, or a child dependent on a parent, etc. Modern witchcraft is more fortunate than historic, in that the idea of solitary craft is well established & supported – I think it would be easier to leave a coven now than historically.
(This would preclude any kind of “we’re all living in a village/commune/island” type plans. I have a lot of American-small-town-Christian-cult fantasies, like joining the Amish or the Mennonites or something. Such communities are very vulnerable to abuse, because exiting means leaving everything behind.)
Whenever you make a decision, ask “why”
Part of the benefit of a constitution is an opportunity to reflect on why these decisions are being made. There’s a nice phrase that keeps coming up in the UK government consultation about barring trans people from single-sex spaces: you can only do this if it is a “proportionate means of meeting a legitimate aim”. I like that:- What is our aim?
- Is it legitimate?
- Is this the right means to meet it?
- Are there other ways which might serve us better?
- Or do you need to be honest and accept this decision is propelled by a discomfort or dislike of trans people which is unfounded and irrational…?
- oath-bound material
- sexual material
- divine inspiration/avatars/prophecy/power
- Initiatory structures which place some people above others in a hierarchy
1. Is this a proportionate means of meeting a legitimate aim?
2. Or is it exclusively to make me feel a bit special & important?
I’ll come back to this one in the post about Clergy.
Reflect on flaws in your belief system
A lot of spiritual abuse has roots in shitty stuff from the Holy Book. For example – Christianity has stuff about the role of women or LGBT people which are put into use in ways that are controlling and unpleasant. Even though Paganism is generally more lassaiz-faire than faiths of the book – there are certainly ideas around gender, vegetarianism, health, curses, evil power/energy, sex and so forth which could be used in wicked ways. Clergy work should include some reflection on the core ideas of the faith and how members are expected to behave as a result. Do they make congregant’s life better? Why is this a requirement? Is it a Proportionate Means etc? Can we implement it differently? How do we have an ongoing awareness of how this rule is being put into practice?(Most of the problems I experienced with the queer community grew out of underlying ideology which was flawed, or poorly applied, or grossly misued.
i.e. “Here are some problems with cultural monogamy” turning into “your monogamous relationship is politically problematic because it means we can’t fuck”; “Here are some problems with masculinity in our society” turning into “When you say you have a boyfriend, what I hear is he’s oppressing you and I need to liberate you into a relationship with me instead” or “rape is a tool of patriarchy used by cisgender men; the rules don’t apply to me because wlw/trans men/non binary people don’t count” etc etc etc etc.
There’s nothing worse than someone putting a noble idea to use as a tool for gaining personal power; it’s coarsening and destructive and very ugly. It takes root. It cuts you off from things you need for survival.)
no subject
Date: 12 September 2018 13:57 (UTC)Ours is explicitly: "We expect you to keep your agreements about confidentiality, and ask that you return in order to properly part from the group, because there are some ritual pieces that are much tidier if we can do that." But if someone isn't willing, then tell us you're done, and we'll do the less-great but perfectly workable option.
(This is because Dedication and then later Initiation create some explicit energetic ties between the person and the people involved in those rituals, and releasing them cleanly is a thing.)
On faith - one of the things I'm really explicit about is that we're a group of shared practices not shared beliefs, and it's okay to believe different things. (We were talking about past lives last week, for example, where I am very 'I have some theories, but I'm not hugely attached to most of them'.)
There are expectations about how you treat people in the group, and some stuff where treating people a certain way would have implications for 'do we want to be in circle with you?'.
And of course, some practices make a lot more sense with some beliefs than others. (If you're totally atheistic, doing ritual to deities probably doesn't make a lot of sense.)
Beyond that, we talk about ethics in terms of 'what kind of person do you want to be more like' and 'how does that shape you and your magic' and so on.