
Women Under the Spell - magnifique
https://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2019/10/women-under-the-spell/
======
throwaway66920
Lots of arguments about whether this is purely historical or disguised
opinion. The last paragraph suggests the author’s intention is to discredit
feminists imo. Note the use of “God the Father”, “bravely” and “demonstrates”
(the lattermost implying that something is factually true and being proven
therein). Sure, maybe this was a part of early feminism. But also, buzz off
dude. Don’t need this here at least.

> Dr Faxneld provides a most compelling account of how Satanism played a
> crucial part in early feminism—primarily between 1880 and 1930—as something
> employed to vilify and denigrate Christianity, and transform God the Father
> into an oppressive creator and the ultimate enemy of women’s liberation.
> This book makes for fascinating reading as Faxneld bravely endeavours to
> demonstrate the centrality of Satanism in influential feminist narrative
> during the period in a way nobody before him has ever dared to do. His most
> enlightening book makes a significant contribution to scholarship.

~~~
xupybd
Isn't the "God the Father" used to show the maleness of the Chrisitan God?

While I think you're correct the authors opinions do appear to shine through
in that last paragraph, it seems that efforts have been made to show this
history without framing.

Does the article make the case that an alignment with Satanism is a bad thing?
Many modern western values align closely with Satanism. Satanism in its modern
form was a deliberate effort by some to oppose Christianaities stronghold on
the western world at the time.

Is the opposition to Christianity a problem for modern Feminism? Even an
historical opposition?

To me this article simply reads as early feminists rebelled against a society
they felt was oppressive to them by adopting what they saw as their enemies
enemy as a mascot. I don't think that is particularly disparaging of feminism
is it?

Full disclosure, I’m a fundamentalist Christian.

~~~
gatherhunterer
> Full disclosure, I’m a fundamentalist Christian.

So is the author. You can't recognize a bias that you share. If a blind man
leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit.

~~~
xupybd
Sorry I thought I acknowledged the author had a bias? Simply that they’d made
an effort to write something other than an opinion piece.

I’m trying to challenge the notion that this article sheds a negative light on
feminism. That the opposition between feminism and Chrisitanity, especially
Christianity at that time should be obvious.

I would like to raise the question; is that opposition a problem for non
Christians and if so why?

~~~
joveian
As a non-Christian I find it interesting and not at all a problem if true. I
think the same basic thing is common in some punk circles today (partly due to
some racist Sweedish metal bands, but that is a different topic, although
maybe not coincidence that it looks like the author of the book in question is
Sweedish). I don't know anything about the author and maybe it is a
interesting book, maybe not.

However, I did quickly get the feel that this article was not what it appeared
to be (e.g. "nobody dared to do", which seems an unlikely phrase for actual
historians) and after very quickly scanning and reading the last paragraph I
didn't read it. I would be interested in a historical look at this topic, but
not something written to whip up bigots. IMO this particular article should
not be on HN.

~~~
xupybd
I agree it's an odd article for HN.

But I don't know if there is an attempt here to whip up bigots.

I don't think it's trying to be impartial either. This is clearly written by
someone that disagrees with both Satanism and feminism.

------
Mathnerd314
Another book review. Maybe we need an "HN Reads" monthly thread, there's not
much to discuss on an individual book level.

------
elliekelly
[https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/quadrant-
magazine/](https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/quadrant-magazine/)

~~~
strken
Quadrant is biased in the same way that Jacobin is biased.

It should extremely obvious to everyone who reads it that it takes liberties
when picking and choosing sources, that most of the authors have an axe to
grind, and that it's exactly the kind of rag that would publish climate change
denial just to be contrarian. It also has a reasonably high standard of
writing, cites sources, and digs up some fascinating things in its attempts to
wage war on the left. It's an _interesting_ propaganda machine, which elevates
it above _boring_ propaganda machines like Breitbart or the Daily Kos.

~~~
angry_octet
I think it is a mistake to give more credit to sites just because they can
engage in sophisticated sophistry, have MAs from reputable old universities,
and have their citations done neatly.

Personally, I find the propaganda the Quadrant writers spout rather _boring_.
Breitbart at least has joie de vivre.

I don't really think people reading HN should be subjected to pseudo
intellectual hate speech like this. It doesn't add to any meaningful debate in
society in general or the tech sphere.

~~~
strken
It sent me down a rabbithole of wikipedia articles about theosophy and
satanism, so I like it. The framing of satan as representative of rebellion,
personal agency, and freedom in the face of established order interests me,
regardless of how much mileage Quadrant can get out of it.

You can find it boring, and that's fine, but you can't make me find it boring.

~~~
angry_octet
I said that their polemics are boring, not the topic of feminist struggle.
It's so tired that they love the idea of feminists being seduced by Satan and
lesbianism, but it is also harassment of women, and no doubt offensive to
Christian feminists.

Some actual feminist satanists, and how misogynistic the Church of Satan is:
[https://thefront.tv/read/holy-hell-jex-blackmores-satanic-
fe...](https://thefront.tv/read/holy-hell-jex-blackmores-satanic-feminism/)

Not even the Church of Satan is safe from #MeToo!

------
derp_dee_derp
I LOVE articles like this because they prop up all the worst aspects of an
ideology and try to present them as their best aspects.

Have they no self awareness?

According to this article:

* Feminists worship the devil

* God himself is patriarchial and therefore feminism is counter to God's will

* Science is witchcraft

* Intellectual enlightenment and freedom of thought come from Lucifer, and are therefore sin

Have they no self awareness? Do authors of articles like this actually think
that aligning themselves with Christianity's representation of evil incarnate
helps their cause? Do they think these arguments help advance their feminist
ideals amongst Christian's?

It's scheudenfreued, I know, but this might be my favorite article about
feminism of all time!

~~~
ajross
> Do authors of articles like this actually think that aligning themselves
> with Christianity's representation of evil incarnate helps their cause?

It's a history piece, about feminist movements of late 19th century. What
"cause" do you think it's trying to "align" with, exactly?

~~~
klyrs
Apple farmers. Big Apple, as it were. We've got the crispiest, juiciest
sins... _just don 't tell your husband_.

