Trolls Are People Too — Just Like Gays

John Halstead is a troll racist. He bashes trolls without apology. Does he speak of other races in this way? No, elves, fairies, pixies, nixies … even goblins are safe from his contempt. He only targets trolls. His latest troll target was Lucius S. Helsen. Helsen explains:

“Now, have I mocked him? Sure. I laughed at some of his really bad arguments and made fun of them. Did I insult him? Well, I called him an idiot for making such poor cases for his position, to be sure. Did I call his children trolls? Yeah, they managed to basically commit a series of actions which fit Halstead’s own definition of trolling. And if I am truly a troll, calling his kids trolls is no insult, it is recognizing a kindred spirit.

“It’s just that Halstead hates trolls and can’t imagine his kids being them. I imagine it was quite a painful thing to consider. Like a devout Catholic realizing his son is gay.

Halstead is a troll racist. Trolls are people too — just like gay people. They have rights. They have feelings. We need to stand up for the trolls like Lucius S. Helsen.

First they come for the trolls. Then they come for the other fairy folk. And then they came for you—and there was no one left to speak for you.

Internet-Troll-292x300

“If evil though knowest, then proclaim it to all as evil, and make no friendship with foes.” — Havamal

 

Advertisements

Don’t Dox Lucius S. Helsen

1040387_412328152209044_1004636336_o

Lucius S. Helsen

One of the commenters on John Halstead’s post, “I Got Played By a Troll,” suggested that the troll in question, Lucius S. Helsen, author of the blog, Son of Hel, should be “doxxed.” Doxxing means researching and broadcasting personally identifiable information about an individual.

1096966_423228891118970_62574708_o

Don’t dox him

This would be a terrible tragedy.  Aside from obviously being a suave a debonnaire fellow, Helsen is a warrior for truth. He rightly compares himself to Rorschach from The Watchmen.

lawful_neutral_demotivational_by_tootiredtomakename

So don’t dox Lucius S. Helsen!  Don’t take off his mask.  If you do, you’ll have me to deal with next!  And I’m not as nice as Mr. Helsen.

“If evil though knowest, then proclaim it to all as evil, and make no friendship with foes.” — Havamal

“Tolerance” is code for “no standards”.

From John Halstead:

As far as I am concerned, you can be Pagan and a polytheist, or a duotheist, or a Goddess-worshipping monotheist, or a pantheist, or an animist, or a non-theist, or an atheist — if you want to call yourself one.  I’m not interested in pushing anybody out of the Big Tent of Paganism.

And that’s the problem.  “Tolerance” is a liberal code word for not having any standards.  And “inclusiveness” is code for letting the lowest common denominator dilute your religion.  Halstead’s Paganism is a Paganism which means nothing … and so, it is not Paganism at all.  If anyone can join your religion, even atheists, then it is no religion at all.

“If evil though knowest, then proclaim it to all as evil, and make no friendship with foes.” — Havamal

What’s missing in the climate change debates? The Gods.

From Lucius Svartwulf Helsen:

Because I look at whatever is “climate change” and instead see the workings of Gods who are once again being active in the world, more than I see any effect of man driving too many cars or wanting too many rooms in his house.

It takes guts to say this and I admire Helsen for being brave enough to go there.  If we really believe in the Gods, if we really believe they are active in the world, if we really believe they have power over nature (and I do), then we have to consider the possibility that climate change is the Gods way of sending us a message — maybe punishing humanity for forgetting Them.  Time to wake up people!

“If evil though knowest, then proclaim it to all as evil, and make no friendship with foes.” — Havamal

Wage war for the Gods

From Lucius Svartwulf Helsen, Part 1:

maybe “I’m an Atheist Pagan” Halstead might wanna think before he starts this fight. Oh wait, he already did. Welp, if silence is not an option, then let words be our weapons, at least until Halstead gets driven to the point where he starts grabbing bombs or something.

Halstead has declared war. PSVL offered peace and it has been rejected. Then again, Halstead really started this whole thing off to begin with so yeah, why would he want to stop. As far as he’s concerned, he fired the first shots and he’s “winning.” Not sure how victory is going to be measured without a body count, but hey, it’s like Valhalla, we shall battle all day and feast all night.

Gods, no wonder everyone wants to punch him in the face.

From Part 2:

Hel, for the first real time I am understanding why so many of my fellow Pagans hate Halstead. Gods, reading this article of his is making me want to go all “kill the non-believers” because frankly, he’s drawing a line in the stone and saying “we can’t simply co-exist and not make a big deal about it, we gotta fight it out till I win!”

And he will never “win.”

if you keep this up, this discussion will become a war, and I got no problems spanking you repeatedly. I’m from the Germanics and the Romans. We made war our bitch.

Helsen is a warrior for the gods.  If he were here, I would kiss him.  Or give him a medal or something.  There is a holy war going on.  And polytheists like Helsen are fighting the good fight.  Our Gods are the Gods of war.  And war waged in Their names is the definition of just war.  So look out Halstead.  Cause the hammer is coming down!

“If evil though knowest, then proclaim it to all as evil, and make no friendship with foes.” — Havamal

Pagan = Polytheist: It’s in the fucking dictionary.

From Lucius Svartwulf Helsen, Part 1:

Just so we’re clear, here’s the definition of Pagan

Adjective

pagan ‎(not comparable)

  1. Relating to, characteristic of or adhering to non-Abrahamist religions, especially earlier polytheism.

Oh look Halstead, Polytheism is right there in the definition of Pagan.

Gonna be kinda hard to argue for a separation of Pagan and Polytheist when the very definition of Pagan is Polytheist. And yes, we use the same vocabulary and rituals and so forth because Pagans and Polytheists are the same, by definition!

I know that breaks your little heart to hear, Halstead, but on the other hand Atheists and Pagans are different things. One group believes in gods, spirits and the supernatural, and one group does not.

And as for those Polytheists who insist you can’t be a Pagan without being a polytheist…they’re right. At least according to the dictionary and the fundamental idea of what Paganism is.

From Part 2:

There is no split between Paganism and Polytheism. Paganism is by definition Polytheism. Halstead wants to claim you can be an Atheist Pagan, but that’s like claiming to be a vegetarian lion. Could it happen? Yes. Is it against every fundamental natural order in the world? Also yes.

You don’t get to claim the title of Pagan, you don’t even get to claim the title of Humanist, because I responded to other humanists and the only ones who stood up were Theists. So this can take place inside the “Big Tent of Paganism” but you don’t get to own shit except being an atheist. Because being an Atheist is the only honest claim you have made and the only definition you haven’t violated.

Pagan = Polytheist.  Pagan ≠ Atheist.  Simple.  Read it.  Learn it.  Live it.

“If evil though knowest, then proclaim it to all as evil, and make no friendship with foes.” — Havamal

There’s only one center of Paganism: the Gods.

In this nice little piece of wishful thinking and tortured logic, Halstead declares that Paganism has three centers:

The Three Pagan Centers
I have found a useful tool for thinking about the Pagan community.  Most attempts to describe contemporary Paganism use lists of beliefs or practices.  Some of these lists attempt to be comprehensive, while others do not.  One problem with these lists is that they inevitably focus on those elements that the person making the list wants to emphasize.  Consequently, large portions of the Pagan community are excluded.

Another common way of understanding the Pagan community is as a metaphorical umbrella.  The problem with this metaphor is that the image of an umbrella suggest a single center.  And what the “center” is is a matter of perspective, usually the perspective of the person drawing the umbrella.

Instead of a single circle with a single center, I would describe the Pagan community, as threeoverlapping circles.  Each circle has a different center, a different focus which transcends the individual.  The three circles of the contemporary Pagan community are: earth, Self, and deity.

Earth-centered Paganism

Earth-centered Paganism includes those Paganisms concerned primarily with religious ecology, “deep green religion”, animism, and what is sometimes euphemistically called “dirt worship”.  For earth-centered Pagans, their relationship to the earth is what defines their Paganism, and connecting to the “more-than-human” natural world is what characterizes their spiritual practice.  A sense of wonder or awe often characterizes the religious experience of earth-centered Pagans.  Of course, there are those whose spirituality may be described in these terms, but who do not identify with the Pagan community, including some earth-centered Christians.

Self-centric Paganism

“Self-centric” is used here, not in pejorative sense of ego-centrism, and for that reason I have capitalized the word “Self”.  “Self” here means that larger sense of “self” which transcends the ego and even the individual.  It is sometimes called the “Big Self” or “Deep Self”.  Self-centric Paganism includes many forms of Neo-Wicca, Jungian Neo-Paganism, feminist witchcraft, and more ceremonial or esoteric forms of Paganism.  The goal of Self-centric Pagan practice is personal development, spiritually and/or psychologically, through connecting with the Deep Self.  This may be described in terms of psychological wholeness or ecstatic union with a divine “Oneness”.  Again, there are those whose spirituality may be described in these terms, but who do not identify with the Pagan community, including many New Age practitioners and ceremonial magicians.

Deity-centered Paganism

“Deity-centered” is a term which I adopted from Janet Farrar and Gavin Bone’s book, Progressive Witchcraft.  Deity-centered Paganism includes many forms of polytheistic worship, some reconstructionist or revivalist forms of Paganism, including those which are closer to Heathenry, and those which borrow techniques from African-diasporic religions.  Deity-centered Pagans identify primarily in terms of their dedication to one or more deities.  The goal of deity-centered Pagan practice is to develop a relationship with those deities.  A sense of passionate devotion is what most characterizes the religious experience of deity-centered Pagans.  As with the other two categories mentioned above, there are many people whose spirituality might be called “deity-centered”, but who do not identify as Pagan.  They would include some contemporary polytheists who have rejected the Pagan label, many traditional or indigenous (small-p) “pagan” religions, bhakti Hindus, and many Judeo-Christian-Islamic monotheists as well, including but not limited to evangelical Christians and Catholic devotee’s of Mary.

In the image above, the green shaded area represents Paganism.  No single one of the centers is privileged.  Individual Pagans and Pagan groups may identify with one, two, or even all three of the centers.  (Note, the overlapping area of the three centers is not intended to imply a central or “core” Paganism.)

Drawing Boundaries

Because contemporary Paganism is so diverse, the more inclusive ways of describing Paganism tend to group individual Pagans together with others with whom they share little commonality.  This is one reason why there is so much conflict over the definition of “Pagan”.  Individuals respond to this by either opting-out and rejecting the Pagan label, or by attempting to define the term in a way that excludes those they are uncomfortable with.

One advantage of of the “3 centers” approach is that it recognizes both the similarities and the differences among contemporary Pagans.  On the one hand, individual Pagans can identify with one or two of the centers, without having to identify with all three centers.  On the other hand, the three centers approach also recognizes the overlap between these groups.  For example, some feminist Goddess worshippers might overlap with both earth-centered and Self-centric Paganisms.  Likewise, some forms of animism might overlap with both earth-centered and deity-centered Paganisms.

Here’s the thing: Saying doesn’t make it so.  Saying there are three centers does not mean there are.  Words have meaning and the meaning of Pagan is the polytheistic worship of gods.  And there can’t be multiple centers of something.  If there’s more than one “center”, then it’s not a fucking center!  Get a dictionary for gods’ sake!  You may want to make room for your self-centered New Age bullshit, but there is no room for it.  And as far as earth-centered goes, who the fuck do you think made the earth?  The Gods, you dimwit!  It’s all about the Gods.  It’s always been about the Gods.  There is only one center, and it’s Deity.

“If evil though knowest, then proclaim it to all as evil, and make no friendship with foes.” — Havamal

When your images of the Gods start talking to you, then you know this shit is real.

I finally found someone who despises that Halstead twat as much as me.  I’m currently working my way through ‘s recent postings.  This one was awesome!  Time to be schooled Halstead:

Halstead is an atheist (by claim, I’ve heard other atheists dispute said claim). He doesn’t believe in the Gods. He thinks they are images, icons, archetypes, at best. And the nice thing about those types of things is that they are static. You put a picture down, it stays where you put it. You have an icon that means something, it’s going to mean it later. An archetype is always going to be an archetype, something that is universal where ever it goes. Nice, stable, clean, reliable.

So what happens when the “picture” moves? Well, that’s a bit unsettling. Might even make you wonder if the houses is haunted. What about when the smiling icon is suddenly frowning? Quickly, things are a bit odd. You tell yourself “Well, maybe it was always like that and I didn’t notice.”

Telling yourself that, however, gets harder when other people start saying things like “i saw that picture move!” or “clearly this ‘icon’ is angry over something.” And it’s easy to ignore it when one person does it, but the more people who say they saw the same thing, it becomes harder and harder to ignore. Suddenly, instead of them being the delusional and mistaken ones…you are.

So when you have hundreds of people running around going “Odin did this!” Mars says this about such and such issue!” “Hel likes blackberries!” it gets really, really hard to insist that such gods are but the images in your head.

Thus, when polytheists and atheist views do not match up 100% in this regard…it is the atheist who begins to question.

Helsen nailed it!  I think what’s really going on here is that Halstead is really, really afraid that his picture of the gods will start moving and talking to him.  Because he knows that’s what’s going on for other people.  And he’s jealous, but also scared shitless.  And so he thinks he’s fighting polytheists, but he’s really fighting against the part of himself that wants to believe.  Well, one day Halstead’s idols will start moving and talking and it will be impossible to ignore.  And then he’ll probably just go batshit crazy because he can’t handle the cognitive dissonance.

“If evil though knowest, then proclaim it to all as evil, and make no friendship with foes.” — Havamal

Atheist “paganism” is an oxymoron.

hrafnblod (Ænglo-Texæn Heathen):

Because it manifests as a rejection of and deliberately distancing from the divine, because it dilutes the identity of paganism as a religious movement, and because self-describing “atheistic pagans” are generally hostile to those of us who actually adhere to something accurately described as a religion, yourself perhaps chief among that crowd.

Also because it’s oxymoronic and contributes to a horrible trend in paganism as a whole of playing fast and loose with terminology and just ignoring what shit actually means. …

I can’t gladly suffer weeds in the garden, foxes in the henhouse, or wolves among the flock. …

I simply regard it as the duty of any person of actual conviction to defend their principles and stand by them adamantly. I can’t view apathy or indiscriminate tolerance as virtues.

Yes! The mere presence of atheists among us weakens our religion.  Atheists have no religion.  So allowing them to mix with us dilutes the purity of our piety.  On top of that, it’s just stupid.  Why can’t these fuckheads read a dictionary?!

“If evil though knowest, then proclaim it to all as evil, and make no friendship with foes.” — Havamal

Paganism is theistic. This is not a matter of opinion.

hrafnblod (Ænglo-Texæn Heathen):

Because it goes without saying that my path, heathenry, is polytheistic (or it certainly fucking should, but for people of Halstead’s ilk..). But broader than that, paganism broadly is still theistic. It’s like asking why I’m adamant that the sun will come up in the morning.

I do not view this is as a matter of opinion.

Live and let live is a fine philosophy when the actions of others genuinely don’t impact you or yours, but that is emphatically not the case for those interested in maintaining some degree of integrity in paganism who are faced with parties who wish to subvert and destroy the innate religiosity of it. You cannot simply live and let live when it comes to an enemy who is actively seeking to dismantle your house.

I care because I’m not as able as some to let apathy overtake conviction.

Yes!  The sun rises in the morning and the gods exist and you can’t be an atheist and a pagan.  This much I know is true!

“If evil though knowest, then proclaim it to all as evil, and make no friendship with foes.” — Havamal