The Burning Times: fascinating docu on women's power before Christianity

[sakura]

[[

#at=380 youtube]]

ANd why women are feared to the extent that they are accused of witchcraft and killed for it

Ok, fair enough, we interpreted it differently. That I can respect, but I stand by my view. I don't see how you can take a film seriously when it pretends centuries just didn't really happen, because it wants to make a better narrative. If they truly wanted to help women, or be respectful towards women, they would have told the truth, not gone for the pretty story. If you watch it as a pretty story, yes, it has some great camera work and it is evocative, but why didn't they admit it was an imaginative myth about how they'd like to think about women in the past, a way to inspire women, not a real history?

But haven't women always had special powers? If you look at Romany gypsies, isn't it mainly women who are fortune tellers. Wasn't this also true in ancient times? Didn't some women have this spiritual power? Didn't people seek them out for healing and blessings?

I think ancient cultures knew this and accepted it. I don't think they killed women because they had these powers. But it does seem that most probably teh Church fathers at some point instigated a witch hunt against women healers in order to eliminate their spiritual competitors. Apparently 15% of witches were also men, and they eliminated them as well.

There is a major error in that documentary. They claim 9 million witches were burnt to death, but it seems that most historians estimate the figure at about 100,000. There are some other errors in the programme, and it is obviously biased to a pagan world view, but it is an interesting programme that does throw light on the persecution of witches. But large errors do leave it open to being challenged and don't help.

I do think swallowed that is totally fair. Looking back for symbols makes sense to me. I think my problem was I felt that that film presented what they were doing as more factual than that, and I did feel it was dishonest and offensive. I understand it may not seem so to everyone, and everyone's going to weigh differently the importance of inspiring women now, and respecting women in the past.

It is good if the film inspires women - but I would worry a lot that a woman who watched it might take it as truth rather than a story, and that would make them (and by extension feminism and feminist history) look stupid. Which is rotten.

I can't help being upset at the casual way they played with history, because to me it's real people's lives - no-one should lie about it, even to make an inspiring story. Sorry. I just can't feel any other way than that. I think it's especially important for women because we are so often told we're liars about all sorts of things - rape, especially, of course. It seems like a doubled oppression to falsify women's history.

But I do take your point that bits of the film were beautiful and could inspire people, and it is good to feel empowered, of course it is.

I think that is a good point SAF. It would be good if a film was made about types of identity and points in history that could help women build their own identity. This film was part of a series (I think) and it may be that other films addressed that more explicitly.

I might try and think up examples of role models, archetypes and so on to tell DD about.

Alice, thanks for the Crossbones link :) Interesting!

dittany, read my last posts. I have already explained that it is not a good idea for this film to imply that the existence of statues of women goddesses proves their point that women in pre-Christian times were actually powerful.

This film argued that witches, 'strong women' preserved ancient, pre-Christian traditions of their power. Images of female goddesses, though interested, do not prove this at all. Since the image of the woman goddess was the only piece of evidence they advanced for pre-Christian non-Roman attitudes towards women, I think this is extremely shoddy.

Come on ... I'm not saying something difficult to grasp am I? Really?

If you want to say it's a beautiful inspiring image of a woman goddess and you'd like to imagine her being a reminder of woman power, go right ahead. But don't pretend it's history.

Erm, as long as rape is treated the way it is in our culture, I think I'll 'bring it in' wherever I damn well like! How dare you try to shut me up when I mention it?

dittany, I am saying that they, in falsifying women's history in order to make a feminist point, play into the hands of misogynists who think women lie about rape in order to make a feminist point. This is a serious issue. It's not something you can make go away because you find it unpalatable. I don't imagine those film makers intended to do that, but it is what tehy did. That's why they should have thought before deciding to speed away the facts and put their version in place.

I also just noticed you managed to write 'That's the rape that's important'.

Please just stop and look at what you are saying.

Hahaha, LDR the parrot.

Good points as always dittany.

Poor scholarship in a documentary that purports to be historical plays into the hands of people who think that women aren't capable of rigorous thinking/study/analysis, though. A point that LDR and others have been making consistently on this thread.

There is no way in hell that is a 'mistake'. It's a misrepresentation; a lie.

As to not talking about what the men do ... you have just told me to stop talking about rape. You. Not men. You. You'd rather have a bitch at me than hear me talk about rape. Which one is more important, dittany, women getting raped or you having a bitch on the internet?

I've been reading the account of the witch trials on the Gendercide website. Has anybody got experience of reading about other events on the website?

talk about the men who raped women as part of their persecution of women. That's the rape that's important.

As compared to some unimportant rape?