Quite a bit of these discussions reflect the problem of capitalism in its different lights. Do you believe that capital is, originally, the result of theft (spoils of war, land enclosures, etc) or the result of hard work and foresightedness? I'd say "Both", as I imagine many others would, in the framework of contemporary experience. But one's perspective on this question colours one's entire view of social structure and fairness.
Federici understands capitalism as theft, iirc (am probably simplifying a lot). Furthermore, she believes that such theft has been deliberately inflicted on women. Her thesis is that property, labour and children have been systematically stolen from women, by men, to accumulate capital for the patriarchal male.
The fact that I disagree with this somewhat - I think there's a lot more accident, fudgery and unthinkingness involved - goes a long way to explain why Dittany and I disagree fundamentally on some important issues. While there is no disputing the current outcomes, at least not to a feminist, our different perspectives inform what we feel can be done to improve things (and other stuff). I perceive an 'accidental patriarchy'; others see it as a concerted male effort against women.
That explains our irreconcilable perceptions of the witch trials. To me, they were an obscene exertion of power by a threatened institution. The fact that its victims were predominantly women is an 'accident', in that the institution didn't care much about the gender of its victims. Others, like Federici, see it as specifically targeted against women.