Are there not enough problems in the world of Paganism that people have to nit pick over terminology found in the dictionary? Each website, each dictionary is not updated on a daily basis...sometimes sites and books are only updated once a month (website)/year (book)...if that.
I find it ridiculous when people get so up in arms about something they read in a dictionary. I'd be more worried about what's posted in a newspaper about various Pagans rather than what Webster's has to say. More people read the newspapers on a regular basis than dictionaries, and it's not too common for people to look up words like Witch, Wiccan, Pagan or Heathen.
You don't see me getting all up in arms by the definition I find in the dictionary regarding "Witch".
From Merriam-Webster.com:
Witch:
1: one that is credited with usually malignant supernatural powers; especially: a woman practicing usually black witchcraft often with the aid of a devil or familiar: sorceress -- compare warlock
2: an ugly old woman: hag
3: a charming or alluring girl or woman
4: a practitioner of Wicca
All of the "definitions" of Witch I can have an issue with...but do you see me crying persecution and posting a legnthy petition to Merriam-Webster to change their definition? No. Why? Because it's roughly historically accurate. Many people long ago though a Witch was a malevolent woman who possessed supernatural powers, practicing black magic and usually aided by the devil; mostly old women. Today, usually younger women/girls, some practitioners of Wicca.
I'm not making a big deal about the term Witch being used in the dictionary, so why should anyone else? It's NOT that big a deal.
Stop crying persecution, it makes me sick
(source of this..."rant")
http://www.paganspace.net/forum/topics/fellow-pagans-and-non-christians-we-have-a-problem
http://www.paganspace.net/forum/topics/dictionary-com-petition
Ma’iingan
No comments:
Post a Comment