INTRODUCTION
The Theory of Forms is a philosophical concept from Plato positing that there is an ultimate form for everything – from a chair to a dog to selfishness to a tree. An ultimate form is a non-physical template of an ideal thing which encompasses every iteration of that thing. Every chair encountered is merely a shadow of the ultimate form of a Chair, each dog a fraction of the ultimate form of Dog-ness, and so forth. That is, everything that exists in space and time is a limited echo of the fuller, complete essence it is expressing (Still confused? Read more here).
From this Theory of Forms evolved the idea of archetypes. An archetype is essentially that ultimate form mentioned above- the ultimate Chair that defines all chairs, the ultimate Dog mirrored in all dogs, and so forth. Archetypes embody symbols, ideas, and motifs which have demonstrated a pattern of re-occurrence. Humans love patterns, and archetypes are one of the ways we build patterns of connection and make sense of our lives.
Now we have established what an archetype is, we can discuss the settings and relationships they are cast within.
DUALITIES
The most basic level of archetypal relationships is a duality. A duality is the idea of two (or dual) fundamental archetypes that harmonize with and/or oppose each other. Or, restated, it’s the belief that there are two ultimate forms to which all other forms somehow fit or belong.
Examples of archetypal dichotomies include yin and yang, good and evil, black and white.
Dualities are simple and direct in their patterns. They feel easy to overlay on our life experiences- as directly or diffused as feels comfortable. But while duality offers a simpler blueprint for the patterns of life, much is lost in translation.
GENDER DUALITY
The gender duality of “male” and “female” is embedded deeply within most cultures and religions. Masculinity is considered an archetype assigned particular ideal “male” qualities, and femininity is an archetype assigned particular ideal “female” qualities. In the gender duality, these two forces interplay in opposition and harmony. And, as is also true of other dualities, the gender duality represents a overly-reductive approach to the actual complexities of identity.
Common ideal attributes embedded within each archetypal gender include:
| FEMALE | MALE |
| Earth | Sun |
| Will Receive | Will Enter |
| Creation | Destruction |
| Water | Fire |
| Energy | Action |
Gender archetypes are very present in neopagan and nature religions as well as associated practices, such as astrology and tarot. However, there are several reasons why this is not a useful archetype model and in fact causes active harm.
PROBLEMATIC ARCHETYPES
The reality of sex and gender is that they are not a binary (as discussed in greater detail here). Forcing all humans into a false dichotomy perpetuates belief in that falsehood, as well as othering those who cannot neatly be sorted one way or the other.
When discussing this topic, often the defense of claiming gender archetypes are intended to be symbolic (and some elements of the divine feminine is said to exist within males, and the divine masculine within females etc.), but attaching archetypal traits to gender inevitably conditions association of gender with particular characteristics (which may or may not be true on a individual basis). A feminine-identifying human doesn’t have to fit into this narrow definition of what personal attributes have been assigned as divinely feminine – and neither do masculine-identifying humans. Assigning archetypal gendered characteristics is part of a larger narrative erasing experiences beyond the reductive gender binary.
Archetypes are intended to be utilized as a tool. If a tool is overly simplistic or is causing unnecessary harm, who would argue that another tool should be substituted? There are options for richer archetypal models beyond gender duality – so, instead of defending hurtful outdated practices, we should evaluate and evolve our craft. Nature is diverse – certainly we should honor that diversity and its author.
HETERONORMATIVE CONTEXTS: GENDER ARCHETYPES CONTINUED
An additional harmful side effect of a divine model of gender duality is the elevation of the heterosexual relationship. The framing becomes that a male (one side of the duality) sexually paired with a female (the other side of the duality) creates a balance (both sides of the duality in union) of energies and forces. In Wicca, the Great Rite is symbolic of sexual intercourse between God and Goddess and is perceived as a powerful spiritual tool. Astrology often assumes male/female relationships as well.
Again, this reductionist approach to the diversity and divinity of sexuality (including those who lack sexual attraction and those who end up in a male/female relationship but are bixsexual) continues the theme of erasing or minimizing the power of nature’s true diversity. And yes, sexuality outside of heterosexuality are definitely present in nature. This isn’t to say that fertility shouldn’t have a place in our craft if it speaks to us, but it is to say that respecting fertility rites because they connect to a divine model of gender duality and sacred heterosexuality should be questioned.
BETTER ARCHETYPES = BETTER TOOLS
The solution? Create a broader range of archetypes – something not based on human identities. My personal alternative is earth archetypes- associating animals and the cycles of seasons with symbolic traits. This cultivates a deeper respect for the natural world as well as broadens the means by which I see the divine reaching out to communicate.
However, it is up to each of us to connect our craft to what resonates with our spirituality. If you seek to cultivate a welcoming framing for Nature’s diverse creations, manifest that intent and follow the Universe’s lead.
Ready for some inspiration? Here’s some inspiration to help Queer Your Craft. Or, you can return to the home page.
Let us engage with nature and its realities in all the richness of its many variations.
queering the craft 