The piece nobody has written yet — because they'd need to have read White's Kiss of the Yoginī (the four-mechanism sublimation, the kuṇḍalinī as the internalized Yoginī, the guru claiming the womb) and the modern "sacred feminine / kuṇḍalinī-awakening / divine-feminine-yoga" literature in the same week — is this: the "honoring of the sacred feminine" in modern kuṇḍalinī-yoga is, historically, the exact opposite of what it claims — it is the celebration of the woman's erasure.
White's thesis, fully assembled across Ch8: the real, external, autonomous, dangerous Yoginī (whose drunk discharge was the Kaula hard core) was cut out of her own tradition by four mechanisms — internalized (she became the kuṇḍalinī, a controllable serpent in the male spine), semanticized (her fluid became a mantra, her orgasmic cry the kāmatattva "ha"), masculinized (the guru took her initiatory womb-role, "inseminating" the disciple while the medical knowledge of the female contribution was censored), and substituted (the woman-as-consort became "the supreme essence," a yogic technique). The modern "kuṇḍalinī as the divine feminine rising within" — celebrated as honoring the sacred feminine — is the endpoint of this erasure: the feminine is worshipped within the (often male) practitioner's own body precisely because the real external woman was removed. The serpent coiled around the inner liṅgam, "her mouth on its tip," is the ghost of the Yoginī's embrace in a body that no longer needs her.
Extends Kuṇḍalinī as Internalized Yoginī, the Masculinization of Initiation, and the Sublimation Arc. Pulls against the modern-yoga / wellness register (the "divine feminine" as recovery). The cross-domain reach is into gender studies / the politics of spiritual appropriation — the essay would need the feminist-theory vocabulary of "appropriation of the feminine" set against White's historical mechanism.
Essay seed: The angle nobody has written — "The Sacred Feminine Within Is the Woman Erased Without." Audience: the modern yoga/spiritual-feminism world, which would resist it fiercely (it inverts their central good). What you'd need to argue it confidently: (1) White's four mechanisms (have it); (2) the modern "divine feminine yoga" discourse (need to survey it); (3) the feminist-theory frame for distinguishing honoring from appropriating/erasing the feminine. The essay's bombshell: the more lovingly modern practice "honors the goddess within," the more completely it may be celebrating the sublimation that removed the goddess without — and recovering the real sacred feminine would mean recovering the autonomous, dangerous, external Yoginī (the one who eats you), not the controllable serpent in your own spine.
Collision candidate: directly against any vault page (practitioner-lineage) that treats the kuṇḍalinī/chakra system as the recovery or honoring of the feminine. Filed as a collision below.
[ ] A second source (a modern-yoga / divine-feminine text) read against White independently [ ] Survives two sessions [ ] The third wire (the celebration-perpetuates-the-erasure claim) holds under scrutiny [ ] Falsifiable core: does the modern "sacred feminine" discourse actually perpetuate the erasure, or does re-externalizing the goddess (worshipping real women, real Yoginī-figures) escape it?