Page:What Men Want - Initial Thoughts on the Male Goddess Movement.pdf/23

Rh some or all of their rituals, activities and training to men. Furthermore, I have come across many anecdotal examples of polytheistic male Pagans incorporating goddesses into their personal pantheons of belief and practice.

Whatever the longer-term future of the MGM, it is clear that it marks a ‘second wave’ of male Pagan practice. Indeed, it is founded upon a rejection of those essentialist constructions of mythopoetic masculinity within the first wave of the Pagan Men’s Movement. Demographically the MGM might conform closely to the broader Pagan movement, but it presents a radicalized version of mainstream dynamics, particularly in the arena of ritual practice. As stated, mainstream Paganisms are often constructed around essentialized polarities of gender. Wiccan ritual practice, for example, is empowered by the magical dynamic between masculinity and femininity (as exemplified by Drawing Down The Moon). This symbiosis of gender – the encounter between essentialized notions of masculinity and femininity − lies at the heart of Wiccan notions of mystery and the overt sexualization of much of its ritual practice. By contrast, the MGM retains this sexualization, but its dynamic is built around a different sexual antitype – the channelling of female deity by male Pagans. Contextualizing this within the work of Eilberg-Schwartz, the interiorization of the other is a product of the Enlightenment. Thus, the MGM is philosophically modern, but simultaneously possesses gender identifications which critique normative modern masculinities. Paganisms are often simplistically theorized as postmodern forms of spiritual reenchantment. The rise of the MGM complicates this, meaning that more research is needed to unpick its epistemic roots. Its simultaneous embrace and rejection of the modern demonstrates that more nuanced sociological understandings are required of both second wave male practitioners and the Pagan movement as a whole. The MGM reveals that a perspective is required which goes beyond procrustean categories such as ‘modern’ and ‘postmodern’ and which seeks to understand the interaction between Paganisms and these sociological antitypes. 327