Shame on Wild Hunt. They pulled an article and *apologized* for it bc it might have hurt people’s feelings. *snorts*. I read the original piece (if you look at WH’s page here, they link to it) and it was a very balanced, neutral well done piece of journalism, exactly what journalism should be: NEUTRAL. Apparently that was too much for those in the Pagan community. I find this pathetic and I also find it setting a dangerous precedent. Journalism is one of the things that protects our freedom in this country, to water it down and make it biased because acknowledging that — agree or disagree- there are two sides (at least) to any issue offends is just sad.

There was nothing offensive in the original article save that the author didn’t pander to any one side.


About ganglerisgrove

Galina Krasskova has been a Heathen priest since 1995. She holds a Masters in Religious Studies (2009), a Masters in Medieval Studies (2019), has done extensive graduate work in Classics including teaching Latin, Roman History, and Greek and Roman Literature for the better part of a decade, and is currently pursuing a PhD in Theology. She is the managing editor of Walking the Worlds journal and has written over thirty books on Heathenry and Polytheism including "A Modern Guide to Heathenry" and "He is Frenzy: Collected Writings about Odin." In addition to her religious work, she is an accomplished artist who has shown all over the world and she currently runs a prayer card project available at

Posted on August 24, 2018, in Uncategorized and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. 22 Comments.

  1. Isabella LeCour

    They fixed that link. I hit a 404 page. 😦


  2. Yeah. I don’t like censorship because of a few whine-asses. This is definitely bad precedent.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. The link seems to not be working… I’d love to read the article. I agree, no censorship. “I may not agree with what they say, but I will defend their right to say it.” I noticed some bloggers have recently been booted of WordPress as well! No censorship!!

    Liked by 2 people

    • ganglerisgrove

      and it always seems those being censored are those who don’t automatically embrace the most extreme pseudo “progressive” viewpoints. I’ve been following a lot of the censorship on social media…wasn’t aware that wordpress was doing it too. that’s unfortunate.

      I’m for free speech, period, and that’s meant to protect most of all the speech with which we disagree.

      Liked by 5 people

  4. I am so confused by this situation. While I do not agree with the Pussy Church’s stance on trans individuals, I thought the article had originally been taken down because it was backhandedly critical of that stance. It was not until I saw Storm Faerywolf’s response on his blog that I saw why.

    This is the link to the original article:

    And I don’t know why Galina’s link is broken, but this one seems to be linking just fine to the retraction:

    Liked by 4 people

    • ganglerisgrove

      someone needs to drive home to people that just because one disagrees with a particular stance, it doesn’t mean accurate news coverage of that stance is racist, offensive, or anything else. what’s happening is that people like Storm are demanding that news articles not only accept but promote their particular position on a topic. that’s not journalism.

      Liked by 2 people

      • I am not versed in the principles of journalism, but I would think that even if one’s intention were to criticize a stance within the confines of reporting, there are ways to do that reasonably. I originally read the article when it was first posted and before it blew up and kinda winced a little because it came across as slightly backhanded jabs at the group – and again, I probably read that into the piece because I do not agree with their position.

        To see people saying it did not go hard enough in denouncing the Pussy Church seems reactionary to some degree. If they want to damn the Church, they can do it by laying out available facts and letting people make the connections in their own heads.

        Liked by 1 person

    • ganglerisgrove

      thanks for posting better links!

      Liked by 1 person

    • Thanks for the links!

      Crikey…all of this again?

      As someone who is very much insistent on inclusivity within my own practices, especially as they relate to particular Deities (though with some limitations having to do with piety and miasma, but definitely not in relation to the personal characteristics of those participating), I cannot agree with the stated policies of the Pussy Church.

      But, big fuckin’ deal! I get why they want to do that, and they’re free to do so, and if others disagree, great; there’s a lovely phrase I heard over the last weekend, “Criticize by creating.” I’m getting a little sick of all sides of the political spectrum instead criticizing until the thing that offends or upsets is silenced, “de-platformed,” and so forth. The solution to things with which one disagrees being dealt with isn’t shutting them down (unless active harm is being done to people physically, etc.), it’s–as President Obama said–“more speech”! (I just watched a clip of Rowan Atkinson saying this very thing five years ago in the U.K., which can be found here: )

      I remember when all of the stuff went down at PantheaCon ’11, and then the backlash at ’12, and how people were protesting other people’s rituals–no need to name names, we all know who was impacted on that occasion. No, I didn’t agree with the things which happened initially to set the whole thing off, but I also don’t agree with stifling other people’s religious freedom to do what they feel is right by their own lights in any given situation. I got almost no response from folks when I expressed exactly that on my blog when those later events happened…hmm.

      I also thought the line in the original article on this occasion regarding it being weird that trans-exclusiveness was included in the founding documents of the religious organization…well, a bit short-sighted, as there’s tons of Christian groups and groups in other religions that more or less indicate the same, at least doctrinally and effectively in practice. How is this any different?

      Well, whatever…spending this much time writing out a comment on a blog talking about the matter at hand at three removes is probably a waste of time, but oh well.

      Liked by 3 people

      • As it happens, I very much believe that there is ALWAYS a need to name names. If the naming makes one uncomfortable, there’s a reason for that.

        Liked by 3 people

      • As I’m not especially interested in drawing attention to the non-named person I (didn’t!) mention above’s work or legacy, that was the main reason I didn’t say who they were on this occasion. The person has an initial for a first name most commonly, and that initial comes after the letter “Y” in the English alphabet, and their surname is the name of a city in Hungary. 😉 Of course, the counter-efforts in that later year were a bit crazy, too, and I definitely don’t want to mention some of the folks involved in that, who have since proven to have few scruples themselves.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Thanks. That really wasn’t aimed at you. After the article was edited and published I watched as colleagues picked it apart, all without mentioning me by name or even suggesting that the piece had a writer rather than being self-created. The word which came to mind was “erasure.”

        Liked by 2 people

      • No worries! I am also annoyed that your name wasn’t on there (at least when I read it), as I wondered who wrote the original…and now all of this really seems even shadier and more problematic than it did to know the further background goings-on that are entirely inappropriate to a supposed “professional” news organization. I’m sorry this is happening, and that you’re getting the bullshit you are because of it.

        Liked by 2 people

  5. ganglerisgrove

    an article that doesn’t validate one’s ideology is not damaging in any way, shape, or form, esp. a blog post that isn’t critical of a particular group. There’s actual oppression in the world. This, is not it.

    Liked by 5 people

  6. This is probably an unpopular opinion, but if a religious organization wants to only allow certain people into their organization, then that is their decision to make. If this group only wants biological females in their church, then let them make that choice. Allowing only specific groups of people to engage in cultus has a long historical precedent, with the Cult of Mithras only allowing men being the most prominent example of which I can think. If facts such as this are offensive to today’s ‘progressive’ values is completely irrelevant to me, since I’m actively attempting to cultivate a pre-modern, Classical mindset and worldview.

    Liked by 7 people

  7. I love that Pussy Church exists and it reminds me of the days of Appleseed Sisters Circle, back in the 1990s. It was a local Goddess-spirituality group, and everyone understood that only women could join. I’ve kicked around trying to restart Appleseed but now – we’d be called TERFs if we said “women-born-women only can join.”

    Z Budapest got a ration of shit for doing something similar at Pantheacon several years ago – having a “women-born-women only” ritual. That’s when I knew I couldn’t even speak to most neo-pagans any more. The vitriol and hate and intolerance and aggression that was thrown at her was absolutely unreal. I saw that conformity of thought and politics was more important than following one’s conscience. I took myself away from socializing with neo-pagans as a result.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. On FB, everyone is screaming “Nazi” or something similar. It is very chilling and very Orwellian. Personally, I think that there is a strain of Orthodoxy in Paganism that goes to very Universal ideas. These people simply do not understand the word, “no.”

    Also, I believe it is latent Christianity and its Universality and Fear Mongering that lurks behind a lot of this. Fear that if we define ourselves and our boundaries, that we will be harming other people. And the Universality that Christianity insists that everyone follow in their beliefs.

    In the book, “The Gift of Fear,” the author says that if someone disrespects your boundaries or your “no,” they are a threat to your personhood. They have to be control at all times. In other words, a great many of these people who are screaming “Nazi” are threats to our religious personhood. Our sanctity in our relations with our Gods and Ancestors.

    I don’t like the Church of Pussyness and their non-Transwomen policy, but I am not a member, and what they do does not affect me. My son is still genderfluid and his friends remain the same. They don’t like the anti-Trans policy but they believe that they should leave well enough alone and form their own welcoming group.

    One last thought – there is a dominant group who want a certain Orthodoxy, and will stop at nothing to get it.

    Liked by 3 people

%d bloggers like this: