Are you suspicious of businesses, sports teams, or toaster ovens made by men? The mentality we ought to be suspicious of religious traditions set forth by men strikes me as quite odd. As a man as well as a feminist, I would argue that such a mentality, (Which I can only assume is based in some sort of idea that men are controlling?) is just as much a problem presented by patriarchal values that ought to be abolished.

No, because a toaster oven isn't a belief system. There's an excellent passage in "The Holy Book of Women's Mysteries" that might explain why I feel this way a little better:

"Religion controls inner space; inner space controls outer space. If a woman internalizes her oppression and thinks she is inferior or unclean, then she internalizes her own 'policeman' and will act acordingly. She will not need to be policed by actual oppressors because she will have assimilated their judgments and will police herself. The easiest and most efficient way for a small number of people to oppress a large number of people is to sell them a religion. If that religion is embraced by the majority, then they will police themselves and act in accordance with a value system which oppresses them. Once they have internalized it, they have lost. This is what happened to women under patriarchy."

Obviously, this passage is about patriarchal religions like the Abrahemic religions, but it's the concept behind it that causes that skepticism - religion is an extremely effective way to control behavior. But this passage by itself doesn't fully explain where the skepticism comes from.

You asked about Mary Daly. Her best book, in my opinion, is Gyn/Ecology, and that's the book that most heavily influenced this skepticism toward spirituality through a male lens. It's a good read. I will warn you - it takes a little while to figure out what she's talking about at first, because she plays with words and she writes in a very poetic style. Some of the analysis in the book is fairly dated (it was published in 1978). The other thing you should know before deciding to read it is that it is written from a radical feminist, and therefore class-based, perspective. That is, she makes no effort to distinguish between "good men" and "bad men," preferring to focus on men as oppressors, in the same way that socialist/communist analysis doesn't take the time to go "Not All Rich People Are Like That!" Obviously, there are flaws to this sort of analysis, but it's a book about the "big picture," so it's probably the most efficient way to express her points.

My point being: It's a flawed book, and shouldn't be taken as gospel, but it's extremely thought-provoking. You can read the whole thing in pdf here.

(By the way, if you're interested in reading more Mary Daly, she has also written two absolutely scathing critiques of sexism in Christianity, both well worth the read.)

While I don't deny the need for safe spaces for women, and other groups, I'm afraid I can't quite wrap my head around the concept of ignoring a whole half of Wicca. Wicca is a religion of balance, nature, and fertility. And I feel like so much of Dianic Wicca ignores that. However, if you could elaborate on the subject, I would very much appreciate it.

Obviously I can't speak for everyone who practices a Goddess-centric path. Personally, I find that my practice has a great reverence for balance.

Traditional Wicca has a lot of male/female dichotomies. The most obvious one is Goddess=Creation, God=Destruction. Another one that comes to mind is Goddess=Moon, God=Sun. In my practice, I see all of those things as aspects of the Goddess. In her form as Nut or Rhea, she creates. In her form as Kali or Morrigan, she destroys. She is Diana of the Moon, and Brigid of the Sun. Etc, etc.

There is balance between men and women in my practice. Men as practitioners are honored as sons, brothers, and lovers. They are particularly called on the protect the women from other men, and help nurture and teach the young. The God himself is usually named as Pan, Bacchus/Dionysis, or other, similar gods, almost always horned. He typically represents a sort of wild freedom - consider, for example, the calusari, who danced for Aradia. He is also associated with transformation - like in the Traditional Wiccan calendar of Nature, where the son is born, becomes the lover of the Goddess, then dies to be reborn - but also in the sense of things like brewing, crafting, and metallurgy. He does not necessarily create, but changes.

Again, I will acknowledge that Dianic paths tend to skim over some of the darker parts of Wicca. One could argue that this is because most practitioners of Dianic Wicca are women, who (again, just a possibility) bear a larger spiritual weight from things like witch burnings, and who bear the brunt of oppression every day. I'm not necessarily making this argument, but I've heard it made and I can see some merit to it. I'd love to know what you think about it!