Again, the modern Pagan movement decides to eat one of its elders, and the only question is with which sauce.
I foresee that in some not-too-future year, after Z Budapest has passed on, they will call her name among the Mighty Dead at the Bay Area Spiral Dances, and I wonder if the people trashing her now for being a bigot will pause and recall her decades and decades of priestesshood.
Right now though, I am seeing all these bloggers saying stuff like, "I'm a Dianic but I no longer consider her an elder." Really, do you get to choose your elders?
Disclaimer: I do not know Z personally, although I have known of her since the 1970s, and we know a lot of the same people. Her vision of the Craft is quite different from mine. But still ....
As for P-con, people have "private" rituals at "public events" all the time. It happens at virtually every festival that I have attended. But hey, let's throw Z in the dumpster because some folks' feelings were hurt.Let's not pretend that Z Budapest didn't bring a good bit of this shitstorm down on her own head. She has had a year to apologize for 2011's hateful remarks about "transies" and to acknowledge that transfolk are worthy of respect even if she does not choose to circle with them. She has not done so: instead, she has accused those who have called her on her vile behavior of "threats," "intimidation" and "bullying." Chas dismisses the whole thing as "some folks' feelings were hurt." I wonder if he would do so had she made an equally offensive rant about Jews, blacks, or some other marginalized group.
The fact that Budapest is a respected elder in the community does not justify her words: rather, it makes them more heinous. Her history gives her words a weight far greater than the words of some random Internet troll. Until such time as she apologizes for her hate speech (and yes, that was hate speech, no matter how she or her followers try to justify or minimize it) her history will be forever tainted with an ugly stain that may well outweigh her very real achievements. There is a whole generation of Pagans out there who weren't even born when Budapest was establishing her branch of Dianic spirituality. They are going to remember her not as a pioneering leader but as a nutter who said hateful things about transgender women.
Yes, I expect she will be celebrated in Spiral Dances after her passing, until those who remember her glory days firsthand die off as well. Then I expect she will be left by the wayside as a quaint embarrassment. And no, I don't rejoice in that: I think it's a damned shame. Z's brand of second wave separatist feminism, for all its issues with class and race and all its inability to deal with transfolk, was one of the most interesting things to come out of the movement. The most visible parts of contemporary feminism focus largely on "getting our share of the pie from the patriarchy." Budapest and her peers wanted to remake the culture from the ground up. If their effort was doomed from the start, it's no less heroic and tragic for all that. And to have all that good will squandered over an intemperate posting and a pig-headed refusal to own her prejudice and apologize is a great loss to all of us.
I should also make it clear that I do not seek to encourage Z to circle with transgender women. I am not a part of her religion and I neither have nor want a say in its thealogy. Z is free to offer or withhold her Mysteries as she sees fit. But I question the wisdom of allowing her a public room and a space on the Pantheacon calendar when it is abundantly clear that many people find her trans-exclusion to be as hateful and bigoted as black-exclusion... and when it is abundantly clear that there are still hard feelings about her 2011 rant. And so yes, in answer to an earlier comment from Rose Weaver, I do hold Pantheacon and its organizers responsible for much of this mess. Had this ritual been held in a private suite as an unofficial event, there would have been far less hurt feelings. As this was handled, it looked uncomfortably like a slap in the face to trans people and their supporters by Pantheacon. And the subsequent refusal of PCon to issue an official apology - or at least an official statement - isn't helping matters at all.
Do you choose your elders? I might answer that question with a question: are you within your rights to reject someone because you find their politics and behavior intolerable? Those who find Z's present behavior revolting are certainly within their rights to shun her until such time as she makes amends: there is definitely historical precedent for declaring somebody "outlaw" or blotting their name from memory. You may not feel that Z's words rise to the seriousness which would warrant this action: you may not feel the anger caused by her ritual was justified. (You might want to consider the fact that reports suggest protesters outnumbered attendees by at least 4 to 1 and possibly as much as 10 to 1 ... so it appears many more people find her behavior intolerable than deem it acceptable). But that is each individual's decision to make, not yours.
.jpg)
14 comments:
I don't feel that a person can be painted with a single brush. Yes, Z is a transphobic bigot, but that doesn't negate all the work she has done to build her traditions.
I think of her in the same way I think of Crowley and Garnder--sexist, racist Brits who were products of the last vestiges of the Victorian era who also managed to create lasting magical and spiritual legacies. Z Budapest is a second-wave feminism, and that wave is known both for bringing about a great deal of civil liberties for women, but also tunnel visioning on primarily white, cisgender women's issues, often with a stubborn refusal to budge. Granted, this is due in part to the culture that the second wave was birthed from--I wasn't alive back then, but if things like "The Feminine Mystique" are good indicators, then there were a lot of legitimate problems that needed to be addressed, and I and other women today have a lot to thank the second wave for.
This does not, however, mean that the second wave relics of transphobia, racism and the like shouldn't make way for third-wave social justice and intersectionality. We can appreciate the work of our forebears, but also can learn from their mistakes. No doubt the fourth wave of feminism, whenever it happens, will have much to teach those of us of the third.
I wonder if a lot of the people who are trashing Z at the moment know what life was like for women before she, and others like her, got up and said, "This has to change!"
In high school in the 60s, "girls" (we weren't "women" then) could not play intramural basketball by boy's rules. We could dribble the ball only three times before shooting or passing. Why? Because, and I swear to both Venus and Thoth that I am not making this up, it might joggle our wombs into uselessness. This was only one of a variety of ways in which it was made very clear that our only function was womb-providing.
It was a horrible and humiliating time to live through, and Z helped to bring it to an end by being unafraid to say what she thought.
Thank you, Z.
That said, no, there is no excuse for her hateful statements. My personal opinion is that if you decide you were born in the wrong body, you have enough to deal with. Do I want to attend a skyclad circle with you if you still have the original equipment of a male? I don't know. I don't, however, believe that it is my right to be told that a transgendered person will be attending, only that it is my right to be told the ritual will be skyclad. The other information is violation of the rights of the transgendered, unless s/he gives permission to spread that information.
What to do about women who will be triggered by the sight of a not-quite male body? Don't know that, either. It seems to me that, if we are careful and kind, we can solve these problems.
Z, despite her past contributions, has proven herself to be neither. lupabitch is correct that feminism has made sufficient gains to move past her concerns. It's a shame she won't come into the future with the rest of us, but sometimes one's personal flaws, rather than a genuine dedication to the work, dictate one's reactions. That seems to be the case here. Feminism, to be fully pro-woman, has to move beyond "hating men" as a solution, and Z seems to be stuck there.
It is good to be re-educated.
I must have missed that victory of Second Wave feminism that Lupa says has occurred. Perhaps I slept through the victory parade. It is good to know that the battles have been won, that contraception is uncontroversial, that abortion is safe and legal everywhere, and that women's rights are everywhere respected--in the workplace, the home, and in public places.
Second, I will endeavor in the future to remember to always judge the actions of people in decades or centuries past by the standards of today.
After all, we are so much wiser than all our "bigoted" ancestors were. We have the Internet!
Z Budapest, as Vienne pointed out, needs to move on. Perhaps an appointment with a euthanasia counselor could be arranged.
And now, if you will forgive me, I am late for the book-burning. My copy of Brave New World has to go, because it contains all these disquieting and counter-revolutionary passages, such as this one:
"You all remember, I suppose, that beautiful and inspired saying of Our Ford's: History is bunk."
- Aldous Huxley, Brave New World, Ch. 3
Now allow me to put my previous comment in context.
Certainly the idea of allowing people to join sex-segregated rituals according to their own self-descriptions is nothing new.
I believe that I attended my first such ritual in the early 1990s, and no one seemed to think that it was a big deal.
Z's alleged bigotry, however, is based on a perception that trans-women are attempting to get something -- the women's mysteries -- that they were not born to. Unfair? Maybe so. But it is just a form of the "cultural appropriation" argument that is so popular with many Pagans: "Why are you people trying to push your way in here and get our magic/spirituality?"
The larger context in which I see this whole dispute, however, is a sort of generational one. Let's cut Mom and Dad off at the knees.
Pagans alternate between saying "Where are the elders?" and disrepecting those elders as clueless relics. "sexist, racist Brits," and so forth.
That inability to look at people in the context of their times while racing to judge them in the context of our time is, I suggest, not healthy for the growth of the movement over time. It is hypocrisy of the most juvenile sort.
Chas: glad you enjoy being re-educated. Given that one of the commenters is a woman who actually lived through the period when Z came up as a female-bodied person, one of them is a lifelong feminist, and one has written and sold more books than you have, you certainly have ample opportunities for re-education here.
Lupa: The one thing that Crowley and Gardner had going for them is that they conveniently died before their bigoted attitudes became completely unfashionable. Z is, alas, living in a time when hers are going to be remembered far more unfavorably and without the excuse of "it was a different time then." Because, unfortunately for her, she is living in a time when transphobia is frowned upon and the "mutiliated men seeking to steal our Mysteries" line just seems silly. I hope that she will be remembered for her many achievements but, sadly, many of today's feminists lack the context to understand just how much she actually did.
Vienne: I think it's important to remind people of just how far we have come thanks to the work of second wave feminists. Only idiots and people engaging in the fallacy of the excluded middle think that all "the battles have been won." But there are certainly options open to a young woman coming of age in 2012 that a woman coming of age in 1962 could not even dream of. Acknowledging that, and recognizing the heroic struggles Z and others endured to get us this far, is hardly the same thing as saying the battles are over.
It is not out of the realm of propriety to state that Z needs to apologize for the feelings she has hurt.
It's also not out of the realm of propriety for her to individually ask for apologies from those that have hurt her.
It is wholly inappropriate to behave as though the very act of asking for an apology is an attack. And that is not a symptom of mean people, that is a symptom of a society of unaccountability.
Z needs to apologize. Others do as well. All parties involved need to grow up and do the right thing.
This is not an attack, this is asking our once-beloved elders to have a little bit of accountability instead of hiding behind "Thems was differn't times, y'all. Back then we didn't truck with that sert."
Let's try a thought experiment.
Hypothetically, at P-con, a Cheyenne spiritual leader named Elk Woman holds a ritual only for people who can demonstrate First Nations/Native American ancestry.
"No wannabe Indians," she says, "only genetic Indians. The rest of you have plenty. This is for us. Don't try to take away our spirituality and magic."
Would she be condemned the way that Z Budapest is being condemned? Would there be a demonstration in favor of the non-Natives who felt that they qualified spiritually and emotionally to participate?
What a lot of people do not realize is that this is a "cultural appropriation" argument. Z and some of the women who influenced her argue that there are women's mysteries that only "woman-born women" can experience.
You may or may not agree, but that is there the issue begins, and it goes back about forty years, at least.
Consequently, transwomen are seen as "male invaders" and wannabe women. They disagree violently. But that is the starting position of Z and people who share her position.
Kenan, You have access to my royalty statements back to 1983? Add burglary to your list of accomplishments. I did not notice anything missing from my filing cabinet, however.
Scylla, you might be right, but I am betting that Z Budapest will just remove herself from Pantheacon rather than issue a blanket apology. That may leave the grievances sore and open until the next such incident. But I have been wrong before, and I join you in hoping for a harmonious resolution.
Personally, if the incident puts a nail in the coffin of "cultural appropriation" as a bugaboo, then something else good will have come out of it beyond the re-evaluation of gender categories.
The idea that trans women are fake women is a source of violence. I invite you, Mr. Clifton, to attend a transgender day of remembrance ceremony this November 20. Listen to the names, and know that every one of those women died because someone decided that she was not a woman, and decided that her not-womanhood had to be punished by death.
I have no respect for ZB's position because her position leads inexorably toward violence against women.
Kate: You are right. But as Sabina Magliocco eloquently argues, Second Wave feminist essentialism and the first growth of spurt contemporary Paganism were contemporary, and some of the same people were involved in both.
Kenan: I'll have a blog review of your book soon at the blog that you comment system will not let me link to
What Kate LBT said, and the argument that women taking part in a women's ritual is "appropriative" is as offensive as it is ludicrous. It really reveals how one must think of women who are trans.
Transwomen ARE women, they are culturally appropriating NOTHING.
Chas: I'm seeing an awful lot of false dichotomy here, and frankly I expect better of you as a scholar. It's entirely possible to both respect Z's accomplishments as a pioneering pagan and second-wave feminist and simultaneously critique her (and the second-wave movement's) ideological narrowness. No doubt future feminists, pagans, and scholars will do the same to us. Perspectives on issues change. And given that Z is still alive, I don't think she gets a pass on being judged in the context of our time: it's still *her* time as well, and she has had the opportunity to be influenced by changes in contemporary thought in ways that Gardner, et al. didn't. How many still-living feminist pagans of Z's generation oppose her position on trans inclusion?
Similarly, it's no contradiction for pagans to desire the guidance of community elders and to simultaneously call them on their bullshit. There's no dogma of elder infallibility in the pagan community, nor a tenure system. Elders get respect the same way as everyone else: they earn it. And they can lose it as well.
Let me stake out my own position: I am entirely supportive of Z's right to believe whatever she wants about the "woman-ness" of transwomen, and her right to exclude them from private spiritual gatherings, despite my disagreement with her position. I also believe, however, that Pantheacon should *on principle* not officially endorse any rituals or workshops that are not open to *all* participants. What people decide to do privately on the sidelines of the event is their business, but P*con shouldn't be in the position of deciding which exclusionary criteria are acceptable ("genetic women," First Peoples, etc.) and which are not ("ethnic whites," as a hypothetical). Either every possible set of exclusions is acceptable, or none of them are, and I think that we support our communal values better with the latter position.
I am also very disappointed in Z, both for what I see as her theological hubris (essentially, her position is that she knows better than transwomen - and, speaking from a Dianic theological framework, the Goddess who formed them - who is a "real woman") and for her seeming inability or unwillingness to find a less confrontational way to bring this issue to the community, *especially* in the wake of last year's controversy.
> but also tunnel visioning on primarily white,
> cisgender women's issues, often with a
> stubborn refusal to budge.
And let's not forget middle class; my mother came from a long line of women who worked in factories and found practically nothing in common with an overwhelming majority of Second Wave Feminists.
Post a Comment