The Babalonian Imperative

Several eddies of discourse here on S.I.N. have led me to post this-an exploration of something I call the Babalonian Imperative. It is a pervasive attitude within Satanism and sister philosophies that can be defined in at least three ways: }As an aesthetic dominating the portrayal and conception of the feminine, women, and female sexuality }As a complex set of expectations (not entirely derivative of LaVey or his writings) fixated upon the disposition, behavior, roles, and associated symbolism assigned to women who align themselves with the Demonic or with the Left Hand Path. This also, as do all three attempted definitions, applies to goddesses frequently or historically associated with the Underworld, chaos, death, or who were directly adversarial to mankind. This is so because these goddesses are literary wells into which have percolated the collective dreams, terrors, and striving that a given culture has attached to certain feminine objects. These goddesses are shaped by and in turn exerted their influence over the women and civilizations that worshiped and did battle with them. }As a transparent conceit about the (supposed) Nature of being female and the consequential ritualism and illusive artistry that is "femininity." The Babalonian Imperative insists that Satanic women, to a lesser degree Thelemite and to an even lesser extent Neopagan women embody, to the best of their ability, the iconic Scarlet Woman conjured by Aleister Crowley in a fragmented blur of ancient mythology and repressed Victorian angst. She is advised to appear not only sexy but a "whore," and observe post-1960s sexual and gender protocol as if it was carved into the fucking pyramids. She is expected to need sex, as though it were water or the written word, to want it often, and to be good at it. Almost never does this movement celebrate the superb evolutionary chisel that is a woman's power to deny access to her sexuality as much as yield herself to the procreative instinct. Female humans were some of the first primates ever to develop the capacity for resisting an instinct-in this case the urge to have sex while ovulating. The beneficial inheritance of this adaptation to our species is incalculable. For the first time, a male had to truly convince a female to mate with him, not merely defeat his competitors in battle or have a sufficiently attractive and eye-catching member or plume. You might be surprised how many artists keep at it every day in hopes of finally landing some pussy again tonight. There are other distorted assumptions that accompany the Babalonian Imperative. One is that every "Scarlet Woman" or "slut" one encounters is acting in the spirit of pleasure, self-fulfillment, Satanic liberation-or liberation at all. There is no correlation between skin on display and a deep feeling of inner self worth, of confidence in one's inherent beauty and power. The reverse of this distortion states that women who do not "present" in the stereotypical way are not properly Satanic, are not "liberated," or must obviously suffer from sexual hang-ups, fears, deficiencies, or dysfunction. Because clearly, if you really wanted to teach cattle of humanity a lessen about female independence, just flash some titties-that oughta cover it. These assumptions and distortions cannot properly be addressed without accepting a simple fact: that a woman's sexuality simply does not empower her in the way that class and cash have consistently functioned as the supposed "male equivalent." He has the money, she has the sex, they make an exchange, so what's the big scheme? Here's the big scheme, ladies. Sexual attractiveness is different than other types of capital. It doesn't tend to appreciate value with time, as monetary and institutional investments have a tendency of doing. By the time you both are 60, he's probably sitting on a hell of a lot more cash than he married you with, but are you just as sexy? This isn't meant to hurt anyone's feelings, just to illuminate the "exchange fallacy," as I'll call it here. And another thing-the more women a man wines, dines, assists, etc. the higher the collective opinion of women in his community is likely to be of him. Does this hold true if a woman sleeps with as many men as she can? Does it work for her like holding every woman's door works for a man? This small disclaimer will be necessary, I feel, but I won't dwell on the point. I'm not anti-sex or even anti-slut. The Thelemite and other literature concerning Babalon is a worthy element of that tradition, which preceded modern Satanism in many respects. I called this meme an "imperative" largely for polemic reasons, because there is no such imperative as presented to a truly Satanic woman. Its distortive quality remains, however, and deserves treatment.