My initial questionnaire has been open for just over a week now and I have 56 respondents so far. I'm absolutely delighted and fascinated by the answers that have been provided and have spotted some patterns arising. I am eager to start writing about them for chapter 1, though it is hard to make clear assessments until all responses have come back.
Nevertheless, today I am sitting down and beginning to make notes on some of the things I have noticed. One thing I have found to be particularly interesting is that I had previously assumed GS was inherently feminist; however, though the majority of respondents do see themselves as feminist not all of them do. Furthermore, of my 5 diagnostic characteristics of GS "feminist" is actually the least selected option so far (though still common).
This has prompted me to truly consider how GS comprises many different paths. Goddess-feminism has been studied by scholars before me (Eller, Salomonsen, Coleman...) and comprise one approach to GS; another could be Goddess-centred polytheism, which might not be picked up by scholars as it is often more affiliated with paths such as Hellenism, or Kemeticism. I feel the latter has not been studied to the same extent that the former has.
I then wonder how do these distinctions affect approaches to the ancient world? Do they at all? My questionnaire shows some differences, but not large-scale ones. We shall see as more responses come through.
 |
| Sekhmet Statues at the Louvre, Paris. |
