Witchy Ways: I'm not sure why, but I have an easier time getting atheists than soft polytheists
So if you’re just calling that aspect, why can’t you just use that aspect instead of essentializing a deity because of what they do or where they’ve been lumped. That is my big thing with soft poly; the ‘use’ of deity like this seems very disrespectful to me….
Witchy Ways said,
“Also this whole ‘classification’ thing is still bothersome to me… I mean, I know some deities identify themselves as warriors, poets, etc, but most of them fit into like 3+ of those categories, so essentializing them is kind of…wut.”
Agreed. While I certainly believe that deities have “jurisdictions” that They rule over or specialize in, I think that it can be quite easy to over-simplify Them.
Most folks would probably be insulted if they were solely identified for what they do for a living, or an important station they have in life {such as parenthood}; I don’t see why it would be any different with the Gods. But I am a “hard” polytheist, so I guess this line of thinking wouldn’t make too much sense for folks who are not one too.
I will admit that one thing I find especially irksome are some of the correspondence charts floating around listing deities TO USE for a specific need, as if They were a certain coloured candle or type of crystal. Why someone thinks that they can use, instead of work with a deity is a little baffling to me.
