Making Fauna Pagans

[Tabula Rasa]

Hey everyone!

While reading various articles on paganism, I've come across an interesting one by Isaac Bonwits about Fluffy Bunny pagans who think that paganism is all sweetness and light, among other misconceptions.

 

Bonewits acknowledges how they can be annoying, but shows that there can be shown many other categories of pagan fauna that can be good or bad.

 

Making Fauna Pagans

 

Many people in the Neopagan movements use an interesting metaphor (or "clever" putdown) to describe people who are newer to Wicca and Paganism than they are, or who seem to have more sensitive ethical constraints on their magical (or even mundane) behavior than their critics claim to have. These critics call their targets, "Fluffy Bunny Pagans." Sometimes the term used is "Bambi™ and Barbie™-Goddess Pagans," implying a sickeningly sweet attitude about life in general and the Craft in particular. If someone's image of the Horned God is Bambi™ and of the Goddess is Barbie™, others could reasonably assume that person is naive and shallow. Of course, I know several Pagans who are proud owners of the (very expensive) Sun Goddess Barbie™ and Moon Priestess Barbie™ dolls

 

Inhabitants of the Buffyverse know the overly enthusiastic, naive, and yet often dogmatic "newbie" Wiccans as "Blessed Wanna-Bes" and seem to believe that the character of Willow is a good example of what a Witch is supposed to be--although I've never met a Wiccan or any other kind of witch who could pull off the sorts of spells that Willow did on a regular basis.

 

Oddly enough, and hard as this may be to believe, all of the people who use such nasty terms were new to Paganism themselves once upon a time (including 99% of those who claim to have been raised a Witch or a Pagan, but who are over 30). Of course, many Wiccans and other Pagans do get their knowledge about their religious path from just one or two books published by A Really Big Pagan Publisher, not knowing that these are often heavily censored (so as to not freak the mundanes), watered down (so as not to challenge the brains of readers too much), and/or filled with obvious mistakes (so as to save money in the production process). Certainly "one-book wonders" can be very annoying to the "ten-book wonders" who think they know all there is to know about Paganism.

 

And yet, as someone who's read hundreds of books on Paganism and written a few of them, I have to admit that I've met some really annoying Fluffy Bunny Pagans myself--such as the ones who've just read a Wicca 101 book and are now going around telling everyone they meet on line what "real" Witchcraft is all about. Or the ones who've read a couple of books that have (shallowly) discussed the ethics of magic, so now they think doing magic for any other purpose than feeling good about themselves is "Evil Black Magick!™" My son Arthur considers people "fluffy" if they are willfully ignorant about what they say is their religion. Especially irritating, he says, are those who claim to have had ancestors "burned at the stake for Witchcraft in Salem." When he points out to them that nobody was burned at Salem (they were hung or crushed), they cry, "you're just trying to persecute me!" Sigh.

 

But Fluffy Bunnies are not the most annoying critters in the Pagan woods--many others are just as bad or worse, like the Stinking Badgers who sneer at the Fluffy Bunnies and insist that "Only Pagans who are in touch with the Dark Side (of the Force?) really know what's going on." Then there are the Slippery Eels who have learned a reasonable amount about Paganism and use their knowledge mostly to manipulate others and to improve the lies that get them money, sex, and/or prestige.

 

The Bunnies, the Badgers, and other Pagan Critters can best be understood by the use of value spectrums. These are graphic ways of showing pairs of opposites without slipping into dualism.

 

Making Fauna Pagans-rest of the article

[Vixentrox]

Funny, schisms there too. Just goes to show you that all faiths are man-made bunk and there will always be someone or some group that acts like their understanding of said bunk is better than some other adherents version of bunk.

[BlueGiant]

Of course there are schisms. There is a reason why the saying: "Ask 10 Pagans to define paganism and get 11 answers." exists. There is a lot to understand out there, and it's not all that uncommon for two people to see the same thing, run it through their own perceptions, and come out with two different views.

 

The Fluff-bunny phenomenon in Paganism is akin to many who claim a religion but are ultimate ignorant of it. There tends to be a bit more danger involved for the Fluffy-bunny as some rituals, or materials are not exactly good for you (just because it's all-natural doesn't mean it won't kill you, or at least give you a really unpleasant ER trip). Also, well, it's the internet.

 

Atheists have similar divisions, as to what constitutes a "true atheist." Happens in every group. Though, Vix, I agree that every group will eventually have a subgroup that develops "religion" and claims that they are the One True Group™.

[Ouroboros]

Two people, the beginning of a schism.

[Oddity]

I was just reading this a few days ago (before I noticed this thread).

 

Make a few changes here and there, and I think this article could be applied to a lot of different communities.

[Astreja]

I'm a longtime fan of Isaac Bonewits... His book Real Magic is in my collection. (He also came up with the ABCDEF cult danger evaluation instrument.)

 

As for schisms -- Some years ago, my partner and I jokingly came up with a coffee-worshipping religion and five minutes later had a regular/decaf split.

[Shyone]

I'm a longtime fan of Isaac Bonewits... His book Real Magic is in my collection. (He also came up with the ABCDEF cult danger evaluation instrument.)

 

As for schisms -- Some years ago, my partner and I jokingly came up with a coffee-worshipping religion and five minutes later had a regular/decaf split.

Kind of like this:

 

http://www.ex-christian.net/index.php?/topic/34785-a-god-everyone-can-believe-in/