October has always been my favorite month in Kern County.  Crisping temperatures, drying breezes, and the scents of flora getting ready for a winter's sleep make it a most delightful time to pluck some sprigs from my herb garden without a stitch of clothing on.  There is no purer way to immerse one's self in the Earth and her comforting biosphere.

The simple lives of singing wrens and calling ravens may not reflect it, but a disaster of major proportions is under way.  It is one entirely of our species' making, yet one so intangible that it can all but be officially declared out of existence.

The imaginary life's savings of millions of good people are disappearing before their own eyes, even though neither they nor any government agency or even the hands of thieves or robbers have touched it.

We've staked our very lives' futures on a financial parlor game that can be brought down by intangible events on the other side of the globe.  How ever did we do this to ourselves?

One rope at a time, we have severed the strings that directly tie our livelihoods to nature.

Money wasn't always an absolute necessity.  Not that long ago, it was an auxiliary means of exchange for goods and services that supplemented and augmented, rather than took the place of, one's own reliance on the earth.  It was an excellent way to keep track of social debts, but people who chose to live without it could do so fairly well.

Yet it wasn't the only way.  There was that other great medium of exchange: barter and trade.

Most importantly, nobody was prohibited from pursuing the needs of life.  If you needed shelter, you could build one; if you needed clothing, you could make it.  And you could do it all without permits.

In bad economic times of more modern design, there was still the recourse of legend: the chest of money buried in the back yard.  At this point in time, that is about the best investment around.

It is telling of our distance from nature that we have created for ourselves such a sticky web that even this old back-up plan isn't quite illegal, but it might as well be.  In more and more cases, anyone who walks into a bank or a business - or even is seen in the possession of - large amounts of cash is regarded with suspicion by authorities.

Be seen with too much real currency, and you find yourself on watch lists.  What are we doing to ourselves, that it is increasingly unwise or impractical even to use real money?

I can hear the collective sighs over the apparent impossibility of turning this ship around.  In our own lifetimes, you are probably right.

What each of us can do is style our lives to minimize indebtedness and reduce expenses that must be sustained on a continuous basis.  That's not good for an economy that depends on debt to run, but I never said that retreating back up a road that we never should have followed would be painless.

Equally important is to confer to our children and grandchildren a value system that reveres and respects nature and finds status in what we can do and not in what we can buy, since ultimately all of our livelihoods depend on what somebody is doing.  The more that we can do for ourselves, the more secure we are.

The closer we get to making our own pairs of hands effective again, the closer we will return to a world in which the only calamities that we must fear are the ones that really happen, not the ones that we create for ourselves and agree into existence.

After much discussion recently on feminism and sexism, two issues that I care deeply about, I need to share my own thoughts on both.  And it's an issue to which Pagan spirituality has much to say.

Don't tune out just yet, guys.

I came of age in the mid-morning of the women's movement, when feminism tasted true power and influence for the first time in the 20th century: its burst into prominence packed so poignantly in the lyrics of Helen Reddy's I Am Woman. 

It was a time of forceful defiance of suffocating and constricting gender roles and the patriarchal caste system of its time: a time when being a socially accepted woman meant conforming to a strict, narrow set of options and resigning to her pre-defined duty to "love, honor and obey."  And in fair objectivity to men, men had to abide by a pretty strict code of conformity as well.

Nonetheless, men held the reins of power, influence, and entitlement.  That sense of power and entitlement extended over the lives of women.

Exuberant a time as the 1970s were, the force of accumulated distaste for an imposed gender role tempted over-reaction in wielding its newly found power.  In the minds of some feminists, the thought of a woman actually wanting to be a wife, mother and homemaker was revolting; it marked any such woman as weak at best, traitorous at worst.

In their understandable visceral over-reaction, some feminists themselves took to limiting the choices of women.  Our range of choices had become much wider, but it was still rather limited if you wanted to be seen as a true feminist in their eyes.

My revisitation above took me a few yards past a fork in the road.  Or was that an on-ramp?  The sign above the arrow reads "Sexism."  There's much more to it than meets the eye or can be cleared by jumps to conclusion, and the merging traffic depends on it.

When many people hear the word "sexism," they may think of the idea that one sex (usually, the male) is inherently superior to the other.  They may think of the belief that men, by design, are or should be "dominant."  Or, they may think of official company policies or even laws that discriminated against women and by design ensured that only male hands manned the helms.

These paradigms made up the cultural jungle from which my generation of feminists fought to escape, thankfully with a fair degree of success.

However, there is another form of sexism, the mention of which causes confusion and surprise for those to whom the first form of sexism comes to mind.  Such claims of sexism cause surprise and bewilderment because this sexism is subconscious and unintentional.

It comes in the form of unexamined assumptions carried internally that, while carried without malice or any deliberate intention to discriminate, affect our decisions nonetheless, and can lead to actions that are unfair to a particular gender, even if those actions weren't meant to be unfair.

The row over Nicole Parra's office expulsion is an example.  Was Parra punished in such an embarrassing way because those involved felt safer in meting out such treatment to women than to men?  I believe so.   It isn't conscious, purpose-driven sexism of the first kind, but it's still a gender-oriented assumption that affects outcomes.

If you feel surprised at a claim of sexism, please look first to see if we have the second definition in mind.

A third kind of sexism exists, and hold on to your jawbone, because I am going to admit it.  It is one of the chief distinctions between early feminism and the on-ramp from the Sexual Revolution that merged into it.  (I took the on-ramp.)  And, it explains many of the apparently conflicting messages that many feminists send out, seemingly wanting to do away with gender distinctions while at the same time emphasizing gender as the defining battle: the border war of sorts.

It is a sexism against men.  A reaction to the centuries of systematic sexism that gave birth to the familiar women's movement, it is more pronounced among the traditional mainline than among the sexually revolutionary on-rampers like myself. 

This third kind of sexism, believe it or not, also constrains women.

It is an assumption that any man who visually appreciates the sexual attributes of the female form must be doing so with intent to degrade and objectify women.  Two demerits if he verbalizes that appreciation.  In its stronger guises, it's a presumption that any man who opines on women's issues must be trying to exert dominance over women.  It is an expectation that any male-to-female interaction must have ulterior motives on the part of the man.  It is a revulsion of anything that hints "male."

As much as I appreciate the wonderful work of the womyn out there, this pendulum over-swing goes too far.  It is unfair.  As understandable is the accumulated distaste for past decades of misogyny, two wrongs do not make a right.

For among the numerous constricting gender expectations imposed on women, some of them involved sexuality: a disjointed world of double standards that would praise playboys while frowning upon "good time girls" for exactly the same behavior.  For those of us who entered feminism via the sexual revolution on-ramp, our vision was more one of having the option of joining men rather than resisting them.  Rather than trying to constrain the sexuality of men, we worked to broaden the sexual options of women.

From the standpoint of Pagan spirituality, which tends to embrace and celebrate sexuality, and accept it as wholesome and natural, it is not inherently degrading to women to intentionally engage the sexual interests of men.  Without a doubt, many men treat sexuality in a degrading and objectifying fashion, especially in a society like ours, still rather far from handling sexuality in a mature fashion.  However, being sexually admired by men is not intrinsically degrading.

To insist that it is, is also limiting to women, though this time it's women themselves doing the constraining.  What if a woman enjoys working at Hooter's or the Tilted Kilt?  Is that not also our prerogative, to adopt a lifestyle that includes pleasing men if we so choose? 

Why must we avoid doing something, such as openly breastfeeding, "because the men will get a thrill?"  So what if John McCain's running mate, Sarah Palin, might enjoy being seen as "the hot chick?"  Isn't that her choice, too?

Some have suggested that "feminist" is a somewhat anachronistic term with connotations that put people on the defensive unnecessarily.  I think there is some truth to that even as I instinctively count myself a subject of any discussion of feminism; even as I identify myself as a feminist.

Perhaps "women's advocate" is a less loaded term.

Yet it remains difficult to separate feminism from the history of Wicca.  The Goddess emphasis of many Wiccan traditions is a haven from the patriarchal flavor of most major established religions in the United States.  The Dianic tradition of feminist Wicce, which I greatly admire though I do not practice that tradition, emphasizes female leadership although many Dianic covens do welcome male members.

The ideals of Wicca, though, are ideals of gender equality and openness and acceptance of each other, even if those ideas are incompletely honored by those fleeing patriarchal spirituality.  Neither the God nor the Goddess are superior to the other, but are representations of the masculine and feminine aspects of the same Divine essence.

When we can realize a society of true gender equality and true appreciation between the genders, only then will feminism become a truly anachronistic term.

One tenet of Pagan spirituality is that we do not claim to have patented spiritual truths or own exclusive rights to them.  Instead, Pagans, generally speaking, rely on the spiritual discernment abilities shared by most human beings to sift wisdom wherever it may surface.

Romans 12:20-21 of the Christian Bible reads, "On the contrary: "If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink.  In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head."  Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good."

What is evil?

Most Pagans do not believe in an all-evil entity such as Satan in Christianity.  Yet evil, like ethics, is easy to identify but difficult to quantify in words.

I have seen some encapsulations that sew up certain features of evil very nicely, however.  One such observation is, "taking joy and delight in creating pointless suffering or unhappiness for other people or animals."  Cruelty to children or animals is a classic example of evil.

This post is not the post that I told a few other people that I was sitting on.  Instead, it is a commentary on why I am waiting to post it:

I am waiting for the worst, longest, ugliest hurricane of absolute, pure evil that I have ever seen since I began posting here, to blow over.

It still hasn't.

This post doesn't take sides.  It doesn't have to.  All it needs to do is comment on the behavior itself: an inky spill of pure evil.

I have watched as most people involved, regardless of which side they identify with, found true joy and delight in seeing fear, anger, or hurt come to people on the other side.  I have seen people, regardless of side, derive raw ecstasy saying some of the most hurtful things to others, without pausing for even an instant to try to understand why the other person sees things a different way.

This site has been overcome by evil, when evil should have been overcome by good.

I'm still waiting.  Come on, good.

Put a stop to the ugliness, stop delighting in the unhappiness of others, and let the goodness in us win.

What do you fill your heart with?  Negativity that comsumes you as it feeds itself?  Or love and affection that multiplies itself three times over?

Watch this, and if you are anything like I am, you will be crying sweet and happy tears on and off all day.

http://video.aol.com/video-...

What sort of energy do you fill your spirit with?

The choice is yours.  The effects affect you, and everyone else.

She jumps into my lap at every chance and gazes hard and steady into my eyes, her black, furry face taut with affection and purring over with purpose.  Her black paws march and knead on me in a befitting spot, reminiscing sweetly of nursing, mom and kitten-hood.  Amber eyes closing slowly, she snuggles safe just inside the doorway of her beginnings.

Whether my connection with my black cat, my familiar, is a spiritual one, depends on who you ask.

Some people readily see the world and its life immersed in an aether of spirituality, incredulous at the suggestion that we are nothing more than molecules and chemistry.  Others interpret the same bonds and relationships solely on biological and neurological terms, and regard spirituality as a grown-up game with make-believe friends and pretend forces.

Black-and-white thinking, however, often misses the point, the truth, and the whole pointed truth.  I am not so sure that the choice above is one of either-or.

Conceptualizations of the mind fly through a sky in which existence leaves behind any need for mass or palpable substance while losing not a virtual ounce of its reality.  Consider numbers, for instance: immaterial, untouchable, yet endowed with an unforgiving exactitude that, without them, leaves interpretation of the concrete realm difficult.

The abstract and the concrete find ways to blend in incontrovertible ways.

That which some people attribute to spirituality, and others attribute to complex and elusive mental phenomena, represent a much more rarefied abstract realm that, I believe, is no less real.  These too, I believe, blend in ways just as real though existing at the edge of understandability, as natural and yet as difficult to quantify as are ethics.

Are spiritual concepts and phenomena just make-believe?  Or do they exist at the vaguely understandable limits of what ordinary material phenomena can produce?

I surely do not consider them just make-believe, but neither do I envision them existing in a parallel realm indifferent to the turbulences of the physical realm.

I envision them as overlapping, like a shoreline with fjords and spits, tides and beaches, rather than a stark dividing line between stone and undetectable.  We wander into the spiritual world on the piers of our nightly dreams, and the spiritual realm returns with incursions and waves of insight.

If this is true, then it is really not necessary to try to prove that alleged spiritual phenomena have material origins, or that material phenomena have spiritual agents behind them.

The two overlap, and it troubles me not if someone sees the universe immersed in spirituality or as a mere ocean of atoms and forces adrift in a hard and empty vacuum.

It's less a question of their reality, and more a question of what you call it.

And my cat approves of this message.  ;)

Like the changing of the guard, the Full Moon rises to the call of duty just as the Sun sets down for the night.  She climbs higher and shines more brightly just as twilight fades to dark, imparting her extra measure of energy to Mother Earth; all of life responds in an energetic reciprocity that gives the Full Moon night its rambunctious reputation.

The two weeks between the New Moon and the Full Moon represent the building of power, of growth and constructive processes, and making things whole and complete.  As the Goddess reaches the peak of Her power early tomorrow, July 18, She symbolizes healing and wholeness for all who choose to draw it down.

This rise and eventual peak makes the Full Moon Esbat an ideal time for healing magick: similar to prayer but with the added push of the participants' own spiritual energy and initiative.

I am sure that everyone who reads this can think of someone who could benefit from some healing wishes between now and then.  May tomorrow's Full Moon remind anyone so willing to remember those who might need to be made whole again, and to send some strengthening energy their way.

Looking out my window watching the birds fly, the children play, and the stock market collapse, I am reminded again of how far our society has distanced itself from nature, and has made true earth-based biological self-reliance the thing of memories and anthropology textbooks.

Our politicians are of no help.  Democrats are at least up front about standardizing and mandating our participation in the interwoven inter-dependencies that deprive us of real natural self-reliance and leave us vulnerable to suffering the effects of abstract calamities that happen halfway across the country; Republicans, on the other hand, sing an alluring song of self-reliance while in fact sewing us tightly into an even more intricate web of global dependency that places the fates of millions of retirement nest eggs at the mercy of the gamblings of ever fewer and increasingly unaccountable hands and leaves the livelihoods of Americans vulnerable to the catastrophic effects of the bad judgments of a privileged few halfway around the world.

But political soapboxes are neither my pleasure nor the purpose of this post, only a scene on which to comment along the route to my destination: the harmful physical, emotional and spiritual consequences that befall our seemingly deliberate renunciation of our biological natures.

A good teaching example came my way in a Jeff Jacoby column posted by another user, titled A World Without Children.

The sentence that really caught my eye and brought about in my mind an avalanche of causes and effects was this:

"The Sexual Revolution, by making sex readily available without marriage, removed what for many men had been a powerful motive to marry."

There is much truth - and undesirable consequence - impregnated in that sentence.

When a society deliberately and yet arbitrarily makes it difficult for people to meet emotional and biological needs, people are more likely to make pressured decisions and poorly thought choices in order to fulfill them.  Hungry people, for example, are more likely to steal, assault others, choose unhealthy foods, or skimp on food safety than are well fed people.

Now consider Jeff Jacoby's statement for a minute.  It recalls a time in history when American culture was dedicated to keeping both men and women in a chronic state of sexual starvation.  Men faced numerous artificial obstacles in obtaining it, and women were vigorously discouraged from finding (or admitting) any pleasure in it.  Worse, and hypocritically so, men were tacitly congratulated for beating the system; the women who handed these men their scoring successes were frowned upon as tramps.

The system rewarded just about everything except ethical behavior.

Today most people agree that to marry someone so you can have sex with that person is a short-sighted and foolish reason to marry.  Yet that is exactly what American society expected back then; marriage was, for many, less a statement of love and more a hard-won right of physical access for it own sake for men; for women, a means of economic support in a society that did not yet offer women many opportunities for relative self-sufficiency.

That such artificial pressure would lead to bad marriage choices and sentence many couples to life-long unhappiness should surprise no one.  Sex became not a beautiful form of intimacy, but instead something of an entitlement for husbands, and of unpleasant duty and obligation to wives.  Husbands were evaluated by many for their abilities more as providers rather than loving partners and companions; wives were evaluated by their competency as servants.

Rather than treating sex as the beautiful and sacred thing that we now pay lip platitudes to, we confined it so severely that the resulting marriages often were little more than culturally sanctioned prostitution in which women were possessions.

But what gets artificially suppressed in one of its human guises usually manifests itself in a different and less adequate form.

We remain a species that needs some form of touch and physical contact between us, so it is not surprising that societies that stifle and impede sexual contact, and even ordinary touch, make up for it in violence, both domestic and otherwise.  This unpleasant substitute kind of human contact is most prevalent - and accepted - in the warlike regions of the Middle East, where sex is suppressed more severely than it ever was in American culture. 

Forsake love, and war may fill the void.

Interestingly, this is one area where our society is taking some small steps back toward nature somewhat.  We are beginning to think in terms of accommodating our sexual natures instead of merely frustrating them.  We still have a long way to go, and with many other concerns than just this.

Pagan spirituality is nature-centered, and as such, considers it more physically, emotionally, and spiritually healthful to embrace our natures and to preserve,and to restore, to whatever degree possible in a person's place and time, our closer ties to nature.

I believe that the level of lifestyle luxury that we have come to take for granted is unsustainable in the long run.  The luxury of being able to travel tens or hundreds of miles on a moment's notice is likely to become a piece of history, even as many people have built their entire lifestyles upon the availability of that luxury.

But as long as we keep sight of our biological roots, the technological advances that made inevitable these approaching hard times will also be the bridge back to a more self-sufficient, natural way of life.

Keep sight of who and what we are, accept ourselves rather than fight and frustrate ourselves, and we may one day enjoy the best of both worlds: a more natural self-reliant way of life accompanied by a technological legacy to make that life as comfortable and enjoyable as ever.

The most profound truths of a spiritual path usually hide beneath and beyond the literal written words of a simple religious legend. 

The Fall of Humankind in the Garden of Eden, taken as a literal account of events by some, symbolizes to me a considerably more serious wrong turn taken by many a human society; not only do we often long for the simple life of our ancestors who built their lives and met their needs more directly from the provisions of nature, but those of us who indeed endeavor to return to nature's roots usually find ourselves faced with a metaphorical cherubim and flaming sword, determined to deter us.

By way of a long series of "advancements" that we thought would make our lives better, we have severed, one cord at a time, the ties that once bound us directly to the nature-based existence that made true self-reliance possible.  With the breaking of each link to nature, we have made useless more of our natural biological responses to threats to our survival.    Helplessness, when blended with hopelessness, is a deadly invitation to self-destructive behavior.

When faced with the need for food, we can no longer hunt or grow our own on the scale needed to sustain ourselves.  Some of us hunt, fish, or cultivate as a hobby; doing so does preserve an important spiritual link to our nature-based pasts. 

But we can no longer live off of it.  We now need someone else's permission to fully meet our basic needs, that permission being known as money.

By the same token, we can no longer provide our own sheltering needs as our distant ancestors could.  When once we could simply locate some open land and built a modest home, we now need money and permits from others.  Like a misguided Adam and Eve, we discarded the foundations that nature gave us, believing that our sophisticated ways could do better.

If that is not enough to spit in Mother Nature's eye, many cities descend upon their own homeless, ordering them to actually destroy the shelters that they build for themselves.  Not only have we discarded the ways that Nature gave us, but many of our cities actually harass and inflict sorrow upon the homeless few who do still try to create shelter using their own Goddess-given hands.

We have become our own flaming swords and cherubim, not only abandoning our natural heritage but imposing despair upon anyone who tries to return.

Yet I am aware of my own conflicting ideals; I, at once, both strive to retain my bonds to nature while I dream of exploring distant worlds and realms of physics that are not reachable by natural devices alone.

Perhaps we can never go back, unless possibly forced to return to nature by what I believe may be the unsustainability of our present way of life.  I do believe, quite often, that the ability to cross tens or hundreds of miles at our whim - a recently acquired convenience that today we tend to take for granted to the point of basing our lives on that ability - may itself become the stuff of history classes in the schools of the future.

Nevertheless, preserving as many ties to nature as practicable at my given circumstances shapes my value system profoundly.  It explains my inordinate aversion to debt; indebtedness is the penultimate surrender of one's own life and destiny to the whims of another.  It explains my painstaking conservation of natural resources; every time I turn on a faucet or flip an electric switch, I envision myself draining a reservoir above my head that can only be replenished so fast.  PG&E thanked me in writing this spring for reducing my winter energy consumption by 33 percent.

And it explains, in part, my Pagan spirituality.  Even among Pagans who cannot, under their circumstances, return completely to nature, it reminds us of our origins and our heritage, and the importance of never forgetting the world from which we came, and for which we are still best suited biologically.  It is to our own healthful benefit to make as much practical use as possible of our natural responses to life stressors, and to retain direct control of as many aspects of our survival needs as possible.

To forget our nature-based roots is perhaps one thing that turns a popular truism on its head:

Those who forget this part of human history may doom themselves never to be able to repeat it.

"We don't want freedom."

These surprising words become even more confounding to most American minds upon learning who spoke them: Fatima Gailani, a feminist.  A Muslim feminist.

The full quote is, "What Western feminists don't understand is that we don't want freedom," Gailani said. "We want to be able to follow the Koran, minus all the anti-women dogma that surrounds it."

She is right in that regard; this certainly is not the ideal of feminism that I align myself with.

More fascinating and informative though, from a spiritual perspective, is that this is what she and others seek and want.  There is likely a good reason.

The spiritual and metaphysical realms are among the least provable and quantifiable worlds that we know.  The feather-like slightness with which this realm touches our minds and senses means that any one individual is unlikely to recognize a spiritual truth, or a path to ultimate truth, unless it grabs him or her with meanings and symbols that are both relevant to one's inner needs and are able to attract and retain one's attention and devotion.

I am a Witch.  It is the spiritual path and medium that best takes hold of my highest ideals and reinforces my most positive characteristics to lead me spiritually onward and upward.

However, Fatima Gailani and I are, culturally as well as geographically, almost half a world apart.  It would be as unrealistic for me to expect Gailani to recognize divinity on my terms and with my symbolism as it would be for me, as Gailani acknowledges, to recognize divinity that comes presented on her terms.

The following bit of Christian prose says something similar in Christian terms:

"There's the story of the farmer living through a cold, snowy Midwestern winter, looking out the window and seeing a flock of birds on his farm. They huddled together, shivering from the snowy cold. With his heart touched, he knows his heated barn has plenty of room for these birds. So he puts on his coat, opens the barn doors, and waits for the birds to enter the barn. He waits and waits, but they do not see the open barn doors. They continue to shiver outside. Next, he grabs some bird seed and makes a trail to the barn, but the birds fail to see the small seeds, lost among the snow. Next, he comes behind the birds and tries to shoo them into the barn, but they fly in the opposite direction to regather into their shivering mass. The farmer thinks to himself, ``If only I could be a bird, I could show them the warm barn.''  Just as those shivering birds want warmth, we want life and truth. The farmer may have failed to communicate with the birds, but God sent Jesus."

While the prose was written for Christians, it captures the general concept well. For spiritual truths to have any realistic chance of reaching us, they must introduce themselves in forms, symbols and metaphors that are meaningful to us and grab hold of our deepest needs.

Yet each of us has a set of needs and meaningful symbolism that is as unique as a fingerprint.  The paths that draw one person on to seeking spiritual truth may not be recognizable at all as such to another.  Yet Fatima Gailani, I suspect, feels drawn down a spiritual path that leads to the same ultimate destination, though its signs and symbols do not make themselves easily recognizable to me.

It would be silly, and in some cases dangerous, to prescribe the exact same dietary or medical regimen, for example, to a professional athlete, a leukemia patient, a disabled veteran, and a newborn baby.  What meets one person's needs may actually be hazardous for another.

It would be of similarly dubious benefit for me to attempt Gailani's path as it would be for her to attempt mine.  The culture shock, the unfamiliarity of the freedoms and strictures that accompany our respective paths, would do more to confuse than to clarify any spiritual truths that we might encounter.

I do believe that ultimate truths exist, and discovering them is a careful art of discerning, as accurately and honestly as possible, when an idea or possible truth rings deeply true in your innermost being. 

And some of which rings deeply true may well be quite contrary to your lifetime of conditioning, admissions that one might hesitate to say in unfamiliar company.  The familiarity of a spiritual path's symbols and metaphors are beginnings of inquiry rather than final answers, guiding signposts rather than destinations.

I am confident that Fatima Gailani is headed to the same ultimate truths that I am.  But only she will know when she is getting close.

As will I.

Light breezes awaken late on a warm Kern night, its ivory Moon retreating three nights past full.  In its serene embrace rests a tree-bounded spot in the garden, a mere one of many sacred spaces that will invite the God and Goddess on Litha, the Summer Solstice, the longest day of the year.

Even though June 21 is the first day of summer, Litha is called Midsummer by some Pagans, reflecting the Northern Hemisphere roots of such traditions.  Here, the Sun's creative power reaches its peak; far below the equator, Mother Earth begins a long winter's sleep. 

As Wicca and other Pagan paths are earth-based religions, many Pagans in the Southern Hemisphere shift Litha, and the names of the other Sabbats, forward six months to properly correspond to the seasonal signposts that they celebrate.

These celebrated signposts are the Sabbats, the eight spokes on the Wheel of the Year that mark the cyclical ebbs and flows of the Earth.  Four spokes mark the beginning of each season; the other four Sabbats are observed about six weeks later, when nature feels the full effect of the respective season that contains it.

Yule, the Winter Solstice, is the shortest day of the year, the Sun's warmth the weakest; yet Earth doesn't reach its deepest hibernation until Imbolc, observed in the Northern Hemisphere around February 2nd, better known to most as Groundhog Day.

While summer begins this Saturday on Litha, summer's full effect isn't felt until Lughnasadh (pronounced lu-nah-sah), celebrated around August 1st.  Kern County residents, needless to say, may debate that.  It's hot enough already.

Likewise, Ostara, the Spring Equinox, heralds the Sun's northward crossing of the celestial equator, and days grow longer than the nights.  Nature Herself, however, doesn't hit its stride in the temperate climes until around Beltane, celebrated on April 30th or May 1st.  The May Pole is, in fact, a Beltane tradition.

Summer ends in September with Mabon, the Autumnal Equinox.  The traditional last harvest of the year, however, doesn't take place until the end of October, when Wiccans celebrate Samhain (pronounced soween or sowin) - and a great many non-Pagans celebrate Halloween.

As with many Pagan traditional beliefs and practices, the Wheel of the Year can be regarded as mystically or as down to earthly as you want it to be.  The ultimate in common ground, the cyclical changes of the Earth belong to everyone.

The seasons, their roots so deep in our traditions and in our lives, can be noted and revered even if you feel no interest in the spiritual realm at all.