What is Heathenry Missing?" post. Essentially, the person with whom I was conversing discounted the article entirely, without reading it, entirely because the author was a Lokean.
Now, I am not a fan of Lokeanism, or worshiping Jotuns in general. But Loptson's article had absolutely nothing to do with Loki. It made no reference to giant-worship, or "you need more chaos in your Heathenry" or anything of the sort. It was a well-written, focused article that made what was, in my opinion as a non-Lokean, a great point about contemporary Heathenry. But someone was prepared to jettison the entire thing, simply because the author held a contrary opinion on something completely divorced from the subject.
That sort of asinine behavior just baffles me.
I sometimes see the same thing on the Folkish/Universalist divide. Folkish Asatruar discount what Universalists say, or publish, right off the bat without even bothering to read it. And Universalist Asatruar do exactly the same thing, usually accompanied by some tirade about how evil Folkish Asatruar are, even if the article or book in question had absolutely nothing to do with Folkishness.
That's one reason I try to read as much as I can, wherever I can find it. I don't judge lore, or new information, based on the political inclinations of the author. I like to think I'm smart enough to know when someone's biases are sneaking into an article or a book (and that goes for a ton of biases including Loki/anti-Loki, modernist/traditionalist, reconstructionist/eclectic, etc. etc. etc.; not just Folkish/Universalist). Much like Odin wandered far and wide, seeking wisdom and knowledge wherever he could find it, caring not if it came from the lips of a long-dead volva, a wise dwarf, or a giant, I will take knowledge wherever I can find it.
And always with a grain of salt, even from the best of sources.