 |
| A website supporting my switchingview YouTube Channel |
|
| A website supporting my switchingview YouTube Channel |
This webpage defines and explains the various ideas I have used in my work, in much more detail than I can give in the videos.
I also list the definitions I have used. Some of these will be standard defintions already in widespread use. Others will be my own neologisms (newly invented words) created to describe new concepts that I have developed.
In my experience it is vitally important to pay close attention to definitions. It is very easy to create confusion when different people mean very different things despite using the same words.
Sex, Gender, Transgender, and Gender Variance - Link
Intersectionality - Linking Patriarchy with LGBTQIA+ History - Link
Patriarchy, Matriarchy and Biarchy - Link
Linking Biarchy, Patriarchy and Intermediate Type Cultures - Link
Simon Dawson's First Law of Patriarchy - Link
Patriarchy, Biarchy, Homo-eroticism, Marriage and Sex - Link
The Link between Sexuality and Spirituality - Link
The discussion of sex and gender is very contested, especially when it comes to debating transgender issues. One problem is that people often use words like "sex" or "gender" inappropriately. Each word has a specific meaning. It is important to understand each meaning, and to understand the difference between them. People have both a sex and a gender, but the two are not the same.
A person's Sex is defined by their physical characteristics and the shape of their body. It can be assessed in a hospital or laboratory. Sex is most often assigned at birth by the appearance of the External Genitalia. A more detailed assessment will include assessment of Chromosomes, Hormones and Internal Genitalia.
Sex is not a simple binary but a spectrum. For most people their sex is quite close to being fully male or fully female, although there can be variations for a huge number of reasons. Many (but not all) of these variations are difficult to measure or notice except in a laboratory. For example research suggests that some parts of a homosexual man's brain are more similar to that of a heterosexual woman than to a heterosexual man. [Footnote 2.1]
A person's Gender is a totally different aspect of the male/female question. A person's gender describes what they know and believe themself to be in terms of male or female. Gender relates to a person's innate sense of being and self.
For most people their sex and gender coincide. They might be born in a female body, and "know" in a deep way that they are female. But for some people their sex and gender do not sit comfortably together. They might believe that they are a woman, but they have a man's body.
A person's gender cannot be measured in a laboratory but has to be stated or affirmed by each person. A person will often choose to live out their gender in clothing, activities, behaviour, and speech, even when their gender does not match their sex.
There have been a huge number of reports of such gender variance right across the world and across history. At about the age of four years a young person would express a desire to act as the opposite gender through the toys they played with, the clothing they wanted, and the words they used.
In many cultures such gender variance was known about and accepted and the person helped to live out their choice. For example in many indigenous nations the US and Canada before colonial supression a gender variant person born a girl might become a hunter, warrior or clan chief. A boy expressing a more female nature would work with other women on domestic tasks and crafts, but might often become a spiritual leader.
The situation is much more difficult in Christian influenced cultures where such gender variance has often been disapproved of and suppressed [Footnote 2.2]. Gender variant people were often forced to keep their condition confidential, and found it hard to acceess information and support.
Christian teaching has a binary concept of gender. People are either male or female with little concept of existing in the in-between state. Consequently Christian influenced cultures often have a binary concept of gender variance. People will transition from male to female or female to male, and live as a man or a woman. In Western cultures such a person might choose to use transgender labels and identities.
Many non-Christian cultures have a much wider range of understandings. They might describe more than two genders, or have concept of a person containing both male and female genders simultaneously. Such third gender or two spirit people would often inhabit the role, clothing and speech patterns of both genders to reflect this in-between or dual state.
There is much debate about the causes of this difference between gender and sex within a person. Like for homosexuality there is some emerging evidence that there may be a genetic or hormonal influence [Footnote 2.3]. But again, like for homosexuality, there is the complex interaction between social construct and intrinsic disposition.
In academic discussion the word gender can relate to the deep, intrinsic, sense of male/female self discussed here. But the word gender can also relate to the social construct or understanding of how men and women exist and behave in any given society. This construct of gender (or of male and females roles) will vary hugely across history. So whilst people in different societies might have an identical intrinsic disposition to gender variance, the ways that they understand themself, and are described by other people, will vary hugely depending on the gender and gender variance constructs of the society they are born into.
Any study of gender variance and transgender issues needs to incorporate this overlap between human intrinsic disposition and human social construct.
Across history gender variance has a huge variety of different labels and constructs. Many of them are related to spirituality in some way.
A Map of Gender-Diverse Cultures
At a time when transgender people are under great attack in the US and across the Western world, it is important to use evidence such as this to show that gender variance is an entirely natural part of human existence, and has existed right across the world and right across history.
I have adopted Randy Conner's phrase Gender Variance as a helpful umbrella term to describe these gender/sex mismatch lives. Using this term avoids defining things too closely, or imposing modern western labels onto non-western cultures. It also avoids questioning whether an activity described in historical times is more related to a transgender or homosexual cause.
New research into the development of Patriarchy has transformed my thinking about LGBTQIA+ history. This happened in the time period between my creating the Intermediate Type and Queer Ministry videos.
In 'Western' cultures it used to be thought that patriarchy was the universal human condition in history. We now know that gender egalitarian cultures existed in many parts of the world before patriarchy was imposed.
These egalitarian cultures valued the role and status of women. Many of these cultures seemed also to value the role and status of intermediate type people and queer ministry vocations. The roles and freedom of intermediate type people was then supressed when patriarchy came into each culture, alongside the roles and freedom of women . It seems that the two issues overlap.
If we study the spread of patriarchy across the world we can better understand the reason why Intermediate Type people first had great freedom, and were then viciously attacked. These suggestions are explained in more detail below.
This total theory and timeline linking Patriarchy with Intermediate Type/Queer Ministry suppression is my own suggestion. But the ideas are built on data and comments by the various authors I have used. I would love to hear if you think the suggestions are valid. [ Contact Me ]
IN European scholarship it used to be thought that Patriarchy (from the Greek - 'Father-First') was the natural state in the human and animal world. In her book the Patriarchs Angela Saini cited the English political theorist Sir Robert Filmer (circa 1680) defining Patriarchy as follows:
"the state was like a family, meaning kings were effectively the fathers and their subjects the children. The Royal head of state was the ultimate earthly patriarch, ordained by God, whose authority went back to the patriarchs of biblical times.
In Filmer's vision of the universe - a self-serving one as an aristocrat who wanted to to defend the King against his critics - patriarchy was natural. It began small in people's families, with the father having dominion over his household, and ended large, marbled through institutions of politics, law and, religion". [Footnote 2.4]
For centuries theories around Patriarchy were regarded as obvious common sense. Patriarchal assumptions were part of life and were therefore projected into the academic study of both human and animal behaviour until astonishingly recently (i.e. in many David Attenborough wild-life documentaries [Footnote 2.5]).
Only in the past few decades have these assumptions about patriarchy have been seriously challenged. This scholarship is only just beginning to come to widespread attention outside certain university departments.
The first phase of this challenge to patriarchy asserted that Matriarchy (Mother First) preceded patriarchy. Many of these theories described a female dominant, nurturing and peaceful range of cultures with a matriarch in charge, and often linked to a goddess figure. Such theories could not however be made to match the evidence.
A more recent phase of challenge develops a more nuanced picture in which men and women shared authority within society. Within my own work I have created the word Biarchy (Both First) as a label for this type of gender egalitarian community. One description says this:
Neolithic cultures were relatively matrifocal, peaceful, and non-hierarchical in their social arrangement.
It should be noted that proponents of this theory do not necessarily believe that matriarchy proceeded patriarchy.
It is more likely that roughly egalitarian societies, in which women and men shared responsibilities and power, preceded patriarchal forms of cultural organisation.[Footnote 2.6]
following on from this, I offer the following working definition of biarchy.
A biarchal system is a roughly egalitarian society, in which women and men share responsibilities and power. The society will often be matrilineal or matrilocal. In biarchal cultures woman's power will often not be expressed through a single matriarch figure (except symbolically), but through a wider network of women working co-operatively together.
Note - Many biarchal systems operate on a communitarian basis, with land, property and food production owned managed on a shared basis within the wider community (as opposed to a patriarchal sytem where production/ownership belongs to the head of the family). But there is huge variety, and gender egalitarian cultures also exist with a military raiding culture headed up by a warrior "queen".
No one is quite certain why this transition from Biarchy to Patriarchy happened. Some theories suggest that technological changes, such as the use of horses, and metallurgical developments producing effective weapons and portable wealth, made male-dominant military raiding cultures attractive and viable These changes enabled male-only groups to move away from these biarchal societies and woman's control. These ideas are linked to suggestions around the effect of Matrilocal and Matrilineal societies compared to Patrilocal societies [Footnote 2.7]. This transition to Patriarchy possibly first happened on the Steppes (now Ukraine/SW Russia) and spread outwards from there.
It is important to understand the timescale and process for the transition from Biarchy to Patriarchy. These matrifocal/biarchal communities were not limited to neolithic times. Many survived into the 19th and 20th Centuries.
The first major phase of Biarchy to Patriarchy transition started about 4000 BCE in and around Mesopotamia and the Steppes, spreading west into Europe. It was a very slow transition only fully completed around 500 CE in the late Roman Empire. This transition can be seen in the surviving texts from these cultures, noting how the attitudes towards male, female and gender variant (both as humans and gods) changed slowly over time.
Both the Jewish and Christian religions absorbed patriarchal ideas into their core beliefs. The Roman state and it's successors in Europe then became involved in enforcing patriarchal Christian teachings after Christianity became the state religion.
Whilst patriarchal cultures diffused outwards from this nucleus over the next 1000 years, many other parts of the world were totally unaffected. Many parts of the Americas, Eastern Asia, India, and the Pacific Islands remained broadly Biarchal.
The second major phase of the transition to patriarchy happened when European colonialism enforced patriarchal cultures on virtually the rest of the world through cultural genocide, forced education, and imposition of patriarchal law. Many such cultures had remained virtually biarchal until this time.
Whilst this phase started with the Spanish in South America in the 16th century [Footnote 2.2], many major cultural changes were often not enforced until the late 19th/early 20th century. For example in Canada the British North America Act of 1867 gave the colonial government unilateral powers to control 'Indians and lands reserved for Indians'.
The Indian Act . . . . made massive changes in the lives of Indigenous women by implementing patriarchal rule with the man at the head of the family and women dependent on the husband. This Act took away Indigenous women's rights and undermined the power that they once had. The Indian Act gave men greater political, social, and economic influence than women as 'Indian status was defined solely on the basis of the male head of the household'.
This had a drastic, negative impact on Indigenous women and began the marginalization of Indigenous women in Canada.[Footnote 2.8]
Such patriarchal suppression of indigenous cultures happened right across the colonial world. Many of these cultures (but not all) had been in some way biarchal before then.
This Biachy/Patriarchy question is an important issue for anybody studying the history of women's roles and gender. I think it is equally relevant for those of us researching Intermediate Type/Queer Ministry history. The two issues are linked.
One cannot study homosexuality or any of these Intermediate Types activities in isolation. The values of the surrounding culture should be analysed, and in this study the biarchy/patriarchal question is important.
Much analysis of homosexuality has been within a Christian influenced culture that takes patriarchy for granted. Within these cultures homosexuality has always been problematic.
If you look at pre-patriarchal cultures which are biarchal or female led, then homosexuality and other such things are not problematic but a boon and a benefit.
Any historical analysis of Intermediate type or Queer Ministry behaviour needs to be carried out within a study of the surrounding culture, and an awareness of whether such culture is patriarchal, pre-patriarchal, or has some different set of values.
A number of the scholars I have used have all, independently, commented on this correlation between cultures in which a woman's role is valued, and cultures which accept Intermediate Type identities. [Footnote 2.9]. Whilst correlation does not prove causation, I think there is sufficient evidence to put this idea forward as a valid thesis worthy of detailed investigation.
I have called this a 'Law' with my tongue firmly in my cheek, but by doing so I hope I can trigger debate, investigation and feedback. If I am right it provides a helpful thesis to explain the hugely varied reactions to homosexuality and gender variance across the world and across history.
It may be helpful to give real-life examples of how gender egalitarian attitudes within a society can influence attitudes to Intermediate Type lives. This is taken from Will Roscoe's biography of the Third Gender cultural leader We'Wha living within the Zuni tribe (New Mexico, SW USA) in the 19th Century.
although Zuni women and men specialised in separate areas of economic, social and spiritual life they enjoyed equal prestige and status. . . . . Men are responsible for the universe. Women are responsible for the family and the tribe. These roles were distinct but complementary: both were essential for the welfare of society as a whole.
women's status still remained high. Among the historic Zunis, this was reflected in such traditions as . . . matrilineal descent and matrilocal residence (husbands living with their wives' families); . . . the ownership of houses by women, including their repair and periodic plastering. . . .
in a matrilineal system, there was no such thing as an illegitimate child. Children only needed mothers to be ensured membership in a household and a clan. Thus, Zuni women were free to choose sexual partners without economic or moral compulsion, to practice birth control (including abortion and natural contraceptives), in short, to control their own bodies.
the Zunis view gender as an acquired rather than an inborn trait. Biological sex did not dictate the roles individuals assumed. Nor did Zuni thought limit gender to only two versions. Zuni berdaches occupied an 'alternative' gender, a status anthropologist have termed a berdache and the Zunis call lhamana.
The decision to become a lhamana was made by the boy in childhood and based on a preference for 'hanging about the house'. It became final at puberty when the youth adopted female dress. The women of the house are inclined to look upon him with favour, since it means that he will remain a member of the household and do almost double the work of a woman.[Footnote 2.10]
There are two main issues here, the attitude to gender variance, and the attitude to sex.
Attitudes to Gender Variance and Homo-eroticism - In a culture where men and women are valued equally, and where women can have a high status, then a person who inhabits both genders within themself can be valued highly for bringing aspects of both genders to the community. In patriarchal societies which maintain a distinct difference between male and female then gender variance (which crosses that boundary) is suspect.
Attitudes to Sexual Freedom - Women's sexual lives need to be controlled in patriarchal cultures in order to be certain of the father's identity. In a matrilineal culture a child can be cared for perfectly well by a mother and her wider family without needing to know the identity of the father. This allows for much greater sexual freedom. Writing about the Crow Nation Roscoe says:
The tribe's matrilineal social organisation provided accommodations for premarital, extra-marital and a same-sex sexual behaviour, divorce, legitimacy, and adoption, and the economic security of women and children. This was the basis for the sexual freedom attributed to the Crows.
and in general about these American tribes
Reproductive sex was engaged in to obtain children fulfil one's kinship role. Non-reproductive sex was engaged in for pleasure and emotional rewards. Sexual pleasure was valued in its own right - it forged relationships, it was entertaining, it was necessary for good health.
In these belief systems, third and fourth genders represented special instances of non-reproductive sexuality and romantic love.[Footnote 2.11]
These 19th Century US reports contain a wealth of information about such biarchal cultures and enable us to understand the relationship between sexuality, biarchy and queer ministry. Erotic and sexual activity was regarded without shame or stigma, and could be for pleasure, to gain advantage, and for emotional connection, as well as for reproductive reasons. Erotic and sexual activity could also be used as part of a spiritual ritual.
Similar reports (although in less detail) can be found in texts from many other pre-patriarchal cultures across the world. I am beginning to wonder if such sexual freedom for women and intermediate type people may be a feature of matrilineal or biarchal cultures across history. As we uncover evidence that many very early cultures in Europe and Mesopotamia were initially biarchal, we can match this against ancient texts describing women's freedom of sexual activity in those cultures. [Footnote 2.12].
These same texts can also suggest the presence of Queer Ministry type activities within these same very early cultures, although such reports may be more scarce and harder to interpret.
Sadly many much Christian scholarship about this has a patriarchal "moral panic" attitude, and will often label such sexual freedom, or liturgical sexual activity, as prostitution.
1. If you study this timescale you can see that there are many peope living across the world today for whom Biarchal, Intermediate Type, and Queer Ministry constructs were considered entirely normal and natural within their parent's and grandparent's living memory. But patriarchy has been the norm for almost two thousand years for people living in Eurocentric cultures where ideas around patriarchy have become embedded. People in those 'western' cultures can struggle to understand that other ways of living might have existed.
This is one of my major criticisms of much current scholarship into homosexuality. It is Eurocentric and rarely studies cultures outside Europe, or limits it's historical view to the Greek and Roman empires. This scholarship can be almost blind to what happened in the rest of the world.
2. Within these broad trends, Biarchal systems can tend to be Communitarian and Cooperative. There is an egalitarian value system with land, wealth and property co-operatively managed for the good of the community. Patriarchal systems tend to be more Possessive, Transactional and Competitive, with value systems based around dominance, the acquisition and control of personal wealth, and a man's possession and control of his wife and children. These Macro (economic) and Micro (human relational) factors often inter-react.
In many British colonies, and in the US, there was a systematic attempt to break down these biarchal, communitarian cultures and replace them with a patriarchal family-based system. This was not just to impose Christian-based sexual and family morals and values. A second motive was to impose western capitalist ideas around property and commerce, and to turn these non-productive lands and communities into profitable commercial enterprises. [Footnote 2.13]
3. Despite the text above, it is vitally important that we don't assume a universal set of values within all cultures. Whilst this scholarship can describe possible general trends across history, there will be a huge variation between cultures, and many cultures will not fit the patterns suggested here. Each society must be assessed, described and valued on its own merits.
For example the Scythian culture (800-200 BCE, Steppes East of Caspian Sea) had a militaristic raiding culture which valued wealth, but had powerfully independent, militarised women, and many tribes ruled by warrior queens (they were the actual origin of the Amazon female warrior legends). Perhaps this was a culture in transition from Biarchy to Patriarchy with qualities from both constructs. That idea is reinforced by this Scythian culture having many reports of gender variant shamanic style healers, but a few reports of such people being denigrated and attacked. Judging from reports by Greek and Roman authors then the northern European "Gauls" and "Celts" had very similar military cultures with women actively involved.
Similarly in Middle-American (Now Mexico) Nahau culture a very early female dominant (and gender variant accepting) culture was replaced in the 9th century CE by an indigenous patriarchal culture, and then by a Spanish Christian culture in the 15th century. The fact that both patriarchal cultures, despite different origins, were both murderously antagonistic towards intermediate type people may support my thesis given above [see my Queer Ministry 2 video].
4. Warrior Love constructs work to a separate mechanism from Intermediate Type and Queer Ministry constructs. They will often be found and valued within patriarchal, militaristic cultures. I will discuss the in the "Talking about Homosexuality" theme.
5. The text above refers to patriarchal, heteronormative assumptions within human history. A similar re-evaluation is taking place within zoology, and the study of animal behaviour. Again traditional patriarchal assumptions have been shown to be invalid. For example over 1500 members of the animal kingdom have been shown to exhibit some form of homosexual behaviour. The natural world is much more varied, strange and 'queer' than people used to think. [Footnote 2.14]
If we look at this Queer Ministry material then it must raise an obvious questions. What has created this frequent apparent link between spiritual vocations and gender variant/homo-erotic lives? Why are there so many reports across history in which intermediate type people seem to have a spiritual role within their community?
As always this needs a nuanced debate. We should consider the possible influence of both intrinsic disposition and the surrounding culture in any investigation. Nor can we say that all intermediate type people have a spiritual vocation. There may have been homosexual pastry-chefs and ploughboys alongside the homosexual priests. But the public life of the priest may have left some record behind, whilst the pastry-chef and ploughboy will have faded into undocumented obscurity. These LGBT spiritual lives may be over-represented in the records left to us, distorting the picture.
When discussing homosexuality and similar issues we must always ask ourselves what lives have not been recorded. Too often we only have the records of the ruling elite, or descriptions of those people that captured the interest of Western missionaries and travellers. We have no idea of lives and attitudes of the vast non-elite population.
Nevertheless, one can notice that there is a common correlation between these sexual and spiritual lives, and that these lives are recorded in huge numbers. I want to put forward tentative suggestions about possible links without necessarily claiming a proven cause.
Many Christian writers are aware of the influence of gender identity and homosexuality on a person's spiritual life.
homosexuals, because of their sexual orientation and its implications for their affective life, will relate differently to Christ and to God than will their heterosexual counterparts [Footnote 2.15].
Whilst some people struggled, it has been noticed that many other homosexual people, in the present day and in history, had clear spiritual gifts. How do you explain these gifts if homosexuality is a disordered way of being?
Many modern spiritual directors are developing ideas which accept a person's LGBTQIA+ identity as a given and a gift. But there is still a strong tradition which sees homosexuality as a problem within Christian life. This tradition has developed a Beatitudes argument to explain the correlation between homosexuality and spiritual qualities.
The Beatitudes, found in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:3-12), are a series of blessings pronounced by Jesus on various groups of people, outlining what it means to live as a follower of God. These statements describe characteristics of those who are blessed by God, often in ways that might seem counter-intuitive to worldly values. Often it is those who suffer who inherit spiritual gifts:
Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted.
It seems that a new Beatitude has been added:
Blessed are the gays, for they shall suffer for the Kingdom's sake.
No Pain - No Gain. There is a tradition in Christianity that suffering can lead to spiritual growth. To voluntarily take on suffering, taking up one's cross to follow Christ, is seen as of spiritual value.
Within such thinking, homosexual people may have developed spiritual richness through a lifetime of prejudice and suffering. It may even be of spiritual benefit to enter into difficult disciplines, such as a commitment to celibacy.
The unique experience of suffering by the poor in the Third World gives rise to a very special type of spirituality. In a similar way, the unique and frequently painful experiences of being an exile from family, church, and culture can engender a special spirituality among gay people. The only healthy spiritual way for gay persons to deal with the exile status is to go through a process of mourning and to let go of their desire to belong to, and be accepted by, all the structures of this world. . . .
Consequently, by deepening their spiritual life, gays can turn what they see as the curse of gayness, the curse of being in exile, into spiritual gold by realising that to the degree they are in exiles in this world, they belong ever more deeply in the kingdom of God. [Footnote 2.15]
Within my own spiritual understanding I am entirely comfortable with the idea that suffering may lead to spiritual development, and entering into a spiritual discipline may be helpful. But as in all things balance is essential. What may be a helpful discipline at the right level may be damaging or even dangerous when taken to excess. The reported elevated levels of depression, mental illness and suicide amongst LGBT Christians may suggest that the disciplines described above may not be appropriate or spiritually healthy.
I believe that this is a damaging strand of Christian practice, which is careless about the emotional and psychological damage caused to homosexual people within the faith, whilst justifying such damage as being of spiritual benefit.
There is also the obvious point that this entire theory is based on a false premise. If we look outside Christianity there are countless reports of intermediate type people who are welcomed and valued by their community, but who seem to display the same spiritual qualities. Prejudice and suffering is not at all necessary to create such spiritual gifts.
I have spent a lot of time on this "Beatitudes" question because I believe it contains a teaching which is damaging to the lives of so many LGBTQIA+ Christians. This teaching is toxic and needs to be challenged. The remaining three suggestions are more benign and can be dealt with more quickly. They are all explored in Edward Carpenter's book "Intermediate Types"
In chapter 4 Carpenter discussed what he calls "Divine Bisexuality"- the well-known fact that across world religions there are many reports of the God or Gods containing both male and female within them. We might now use the term "undifferentiated" or "non-binary" rather than "bisexual" to describe this hermaphrodite quality, but Carpenter is still correct. Many Gods contain aspects of both genders, or are presented as male and female within a marriage or other relationship. [Footnote 2.16].
This suggests a range of possible explanations for these apparent Queer Ministry vocations.
Could it be that the priests and spiritual leaders simply followed gender-variant practices in behaviour, clothing and speech in liturgical imitation of the divine? Such a practice need not imply any gender-variant or homo-erotic intrinsic disposition in the priest.
Could it be that if the Gods contain both both male and female, then those humans who have similar qualities will most understand the Gods and can serve them best? Such an argument can be applied to any ordinary priest, but can be taken further. Carpenter suggests that if the divine is undifferentiated male and female, then those humans in historical times who have displayed supreme spiritual qualities must have those same qualities in imitation and by definition. Carpenter cites St Fancis and Jesus of Nazareth as examples.
Alternatively, rather than humankind being made in God's image, could it be the other way round. Across the world gender variant spiritual leaders will have laid down the teachings and myths and legends for their communities, and will have ascribed to the Gods those gender variant traits that seemed to be of most value within their own personal experience and understanding.
There are many reports where Intermediate Type people born as boys, but with a third gender/female identity, begin to work in the domestic sphere with the women. This lifestyle allowed such a person to specialise in artistic and creative pursuits such as pottery, weaving, leatherwork etc. This also facilitated specialist involvement in music and dance, which might lead into involvement in liturgy and ritual.
In the Mahabharata, Arjuna was employed as a dance teacher to a princess when he had to disguise himself as a 'eunuch'. But one wonders whether this dance was a graceful ritual to find a husband, or something more spiritual and transcendent. Elie Reclus reporting on the Inuit in Arctic Canada said:
"As soon as the Choupan (novice) has moulted into the angakok (shamen), the tribe confide to him the girls most suitable in bodily grace and disposition; he has to complete their education - he will perfect them in dancing and other accomplishments, and finally will initiate them into the pleasures of love. If they display intelligence, they will become seers and medicine-women, priestesses and prophetesses. The summer kachims (assemblies), which are closed to the women of the community, will open wide before these. It is believed that these girls would be unwholesome company if they had not been purified by commerce with a man of God." [Footnote 2.17]
Again this leaves open the essentialist/non-essentialist question. Did intermediate type people get involved in rituals and dance and teaching, and the spiritual life of the the tribe, simply because their domestic roles gave them the time and opportunity to develop specialist skills. Or was there a more intrinsic drive motivating such spiritual work?
The third avenue to explore is the most simply stated but possibly the most controversial, due to widespread academic opposition to essentialist ideas. Is there some inborn factor within some Intermediate Type people which may lead to them being engaged in such spiritual vocations, or to relate to the divine in different ways from their "straight" contemporaries?
Carpenter is interesting here. [Footnote 2.18] Firstly he argues for an essentialist basis to this link:
"For myself, I think that there are two quite possible and not unreasonable theories on the whole matter. The first and most important is that there really is a connection between the homosexual temperament and divinatory or unusual psychic powers;"
But Carpenter also understands the importance of combining a study of such an intrinsic disposition with a study of social construct and custom. Studying both strands is necessary for a total understanding.
Carpenter describes various theories which may account for these Queer Ministry constructs, and which may acccount for why these constructs were criticised by a later Christian moral panic. Yet these construct ideas cannot provide a complete explanation in themself. The world-wide spread and similarity of construct and behaviour is too great to accept that. The total answer may involve deep analysis of custom and construct, alongside an acceptance of some form of Queer Ministry intrinsic disposition.
"the facts to be explained - namely, the connection of homosexuality with priesthood and divination - seem to be world-wide and universal. Therefore, though we admit that the causes mentioned - namely the attribution of magical qualities to old religious rites, and the introduction of feminine inversions and disguises through the old matriarchal custom - may account in part for the facts, and in particular may in certain localities have given them a devilish or sorcerous complexion, yet I think we must look deeper for the root-explanations of the whole matter, and consider whether there may not be some fundamental causes in human nature itself."
I think Carpenter's analysis is still correct despite being written in 1914. I will explore these ideas in more depth in later videos.
FOOTNOTES - Theme 2 - Queer Ministry
|
Finally, can I ask you a favour. I put a lot of work into these recordings and websites, and it would be good if they can be seen by the largest number of people. If you have a friend or colleague who you think would benefit from knowing about these issues, please do pass it on. TELL A FRIEND! - SPREAD THE WORD!I would welcome comments and suggestions on this work - Contact Me. Thank You |
