Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Witch hunts and gender-critical feminists

107 replies

heresyandwitchcraft · 16/08/2018 01:43

As you may have surmised from my username, I see parallels between the witch-hunts of yesteryear and the current movement to label gender-critical women T*RFs alongside disturbing calls to use violence against such females.

I personally have found it interesting to briefly look back at the history of witch trials to get some perspective on the misogyny I perceive in this "debate." Being accused of witchcraft in many countries was (and in some places still is!) a charge disproportionately leveled at females. One might idly ponder if current transgender ideology arguably relies too heavily on belief in an unproveable/"supernatural" force (e.g. that of the "feminine/masculine" essence that transcends biology) and whether there are commonalities between such views and the beliefs in magic of yore. Who knows? Certainly both "sides" in this "debate" appear to accuse each other of moral panic, and persecution.

However, it is definitely worth thinking about historical misogyny. In my post these will be predominantly from a European perspective. I recently found out that "scolding" used to be an actual crime - reserved predominantly for angry, quarrelsome females for speaking out of turn, gossiping, or behaving rudely. This was punishable by the "cucking stool," where she would be strapped to a chair and dunked underwater. Or she might be made to wear what was known as a "scold's bridle"/"witch's bridle," which physically prevented her from speaking lest she cut her tongue, and was typically accompanied by public humiliation.

During many witch trials, once you were labelled a witch you either confessed your sins for a quick execution or you professed your innocence. If you kept denying witchery, you would be systematically broken down using brutal means. In some places, they would tie you up and throw you in the water first to test the witchcraft accusation. If you floated then your witchcraft was confirmed and you would meet a very grim fate. If you sank then you were innocent but at high risk of drowning. You'd likely be asked to name your "co-conspirators," so that the hunters could root out all the witches in the area. Importantly, there was usually no dignified way out once you were branded a witch.

One might ask whether there are any similar principles of misogyny that hold true now. I have stopped worrying as much about being called a modern witch because these historical examples weirdly remind me (eerily) of what women are currently being asked to do: shut up, stop thinking about certain issues, and play nice to keep the peace. I do not think it was an accident that there is a feminist theory that midwives (those specialists of the female body) allegedly were over-represented in being accused of witchcraft. I do not think it is completely out of the blue that it is now the female body which is again being erased from the public domain - only to be spoken of in hushed, convoluted terms. I do not think it is merely coincidental that some trans activists wonder whether women even exist, much less have the authority to speak with authority on the female experience. And I certainly do not think it's outside the pattern for misogyny that the main people being targeted in this debate are dissenting females, with some corners of the internet seeming to wish to enforce corporeal punishment on women simply for speaking, as a consequence for not acquiescing completely to an ideology.

All I can say is that I may very well be considered to be an evil witch. I know in my own heart that I have no ill-intent towards anyone, but I have no way of proving this. I have come to terms with that idea. I now take accusations against other people with a healthy pinch of skepticism - the way I would have wanted society to consider those accused of witchcraft in the past. I try to continually re-evaluate my own position and carefully examine evidence. Throughout all this I have only kept thinking it is important for the other "witches" to be able to have their opinions heard instead of calling for them to be burned at the stake.

Thanks MN for still allowing us to express ourselves. Special thanks to all the heretics, especially the ones who display so much courage and patience on a daily basis. I personally have come to see this moment in history as just the latest in a long line of outspoken women who are being outcast for daring to have an unorthodox point of view. Women still have voices, even though they may not get the respect that a man who is defending free speech might be afforded, or get any of the broad institutional support provided to some trans rights activists.

Perhaps it is considered uncouth for a woman to say that females are real and exist as their own category, unified by their sex. Humans cannot change their reproductive sex.
Females matter. Feminism was designed to help females.
Please keep talking.
And remember to practice your cackle!

OP posts:
sociopathsunited · 18/08/2018 10:06

woman11017 you made me look for Jewish history in Scotland. There's a long history, but a small population (5000 or so just now) and pretty much all in Glasgow (4000 ish) and Edinburgh. As expected in this horrible atmosphere, anti semitism attacks have increased recently, but are still low (in the twenties, but that's a biggish percentage of a small population). It tickled me that in the first half of the 20th century, a new hybrid language developed, mixing lowland Scots and Yiddish. That, I love! I love when cultures languages mix. Alas, the new language has gone now....

DuckingGoodPJs · 18/08/2018 11:14

Interesting thread.

Just going back to what Pants said:
I am not like apartheid supporters because I do not want to segregate trans people from the rest of society.

I sense some (possible but understandable) defence in your post. No one (GC) has actually ever said that, but the accusations have been along those lines. It is a false claim though, because it relies on the parallel of those in power excluding those without power. Women still don't have equal representation in politics or the boardroom or in the pay packet - so we are hardly the ones 'in power' to discriminate against another group.

If the TRA had said "we want to wear frocks and be called Loretta", then they would hardly have been a blip on the feminist radar, more "go for it buddy, whatever floats your boat, it is harmless enough".

But what the TRA position actually is, is that "we want to be called women, actually, the default kind of women, and those other occupiers (formerly known as women) need to stfu about their biology and give up their spaces". We call that a hostile take-over, which is why no compromise solution will ever be reached.

That 80% of trans, and probably about 95% of TRAs are male born and socialised, gives a clue to their tactics and demands. I for one, am not going to budge. And sorry not sorry. I don't feel guilty for that position at all.

PeakPants · 18/08/2018 12:49

I sense some (possible but understandable) defence in your post. No one (GC) has actually ever said that, but the accusations have been along those lines.

Yes, that was my point. We are accused of being like the apartheid regime, but nobody has ever suggested that. It would be like men started saying that the idea of women's sports was man-hating and anti-men (to be fair, there probably are some idiots who do say that).

Alicethroughtheblackmirror · 18/08/2018 19:06

Right, I'm really sorry but I got a bit carried away. I'm afraid this is going to be long...

Alicethroughtheblackmirror · 18/08/2018 19:16

The North Berwick trials are fascinating for so many reasons: cultural, political and social. Although people may not be familiar with the events themselves, they have passed into popular imagination as the standard by which we view witches in the UK. The report “News from Scotland” which sensationalized the events described the Sabbat, the spells etc. It influences literature, notably Macbeth in which the witches talk of sailing in sieves and raising storms as they were reported to have done in NB and also Burns’ Tam O’Shanter who stumbles on the night gathering at a kirk. It’s also important because we clearly see witchcraft allegations being used as a political tool to destroy rivals and as a way King James attempted to assert his personal authority and promote his version of monarchy. We don’t really know how many of the witches died, but it seems that the trials implicated around 70-100 people many of whom would have been executed.

The trials began in 1590 and, while there had been a few small witch trials before this, they really mark the start of a concentrated period of witch hunts in Scotland which continue for about 100 years. I've mentioned the difference between countries before and the disparity between Scotland and England is of especial note. It is estimated that Scotland - or more specifically lowland Scotland - executed approximately twice the number of witches as her southern neighbour despite her population being a fraction of England's. In fact the intensity of Scotland’s witch hunt years was possibly second only to the Holy Roman Empire. Some argue that the character of James and his interest in the subject was a contributing factor (to which I shall return) but the key elements we see elsewhere of economic hardship, political instability and religious turbulence are much more marked in Scotland than England. In the case of the East Lothian women, there is clear evidence of aspects of the old religion and superstitions coming into conflict with the new Calvinist kirk.

Events begin when the marriage of James VI and Anne of Denmark is arranged. Anne attempts to sail to Scotland in the Autumn of 1589 but is delayed by storms and driven back to Norway. Storms off Scotland, meanwhile, drown a Scottish lady-in-waiting. James then declares that he will go to Norway himself and fetch his bride. This is slightly unusual, but James was perhaps looking to asset some personal authority - he declares that he is “a true prince” and not “an irresolute ass”. Behind this may be the fear that some of his nobles had whispered that he was actually the illegitimate son of Rizzio, that his many years as a minor governed by his courtiers has left him vulnerable, and that his homosexuality is suspected. He leaves in charge his cousins Lennox and Bothwell.

James arrived in Norway despite more gales and he and Anne returned safely (if storm-tossed) to Scotland in the spring of 1590. Meanwhile, the Danish Admiral alleged that the storms which endangered Anne were caused by a Danish witch (specifically someone with whom he’d quarrelled): as James and Anne arrived in Edinburgh, executions took place in Denmark, news of which reached Scotland later in the summer. This then raises the question of whether witches were also working against the king in Scotland and in November a likely candidate is found in Geillis Duncan of Tranent, a servant who had suddenly acquired healing skills. According to News from Scotland, Geillis’ own master applied torture to force a confession and then searched her for the devil’s mark - she broke and began to implicate several other people.

Quick digression here: the use of torture was prohibited in England (although things like sleep deprivation etc were used) but not in Scotland. However, if Duncan’s master did take it upon himself to use thumbscrews, this was illegal. The official records of the confessions and depositions do not mention torture at all, but while News may be exaggerated and salacious, the author was in no doubt that it had been applied. We also have a letter stating that Robert Greyson, one of the accused, died from “the extremity of the tortures applied to him” and fear of the boot was alleged to have played a part in the testimony of Ritchie Graham.

Amongst those accused by Duncan were Agnes Sampson and John Fian (aka Cunningham) the schoolmaster of Prestonpans. The first is often said to have been a respected midwife, although her status may have been exaggerated. In the initial examination, she comes across as a traditional local cunning woman of some reputation: she admits to some folk cures - rubbing whisky on the laird’s son and saying a prayer over him for example. As her place as a central figure in the testimony of the other witches is magnified, she is ascribed a great deal of diabolical knowledge and a central role in the political plot. By this point, Agnes had already been executed, so she could not speak for herself.

News is clear that both of them were put to severe torture: Agnes initially refusing to confess until she was shaven (to reveal hidden marks) and had a rope tightened around her head. A mark was supposedly found on her genitals. The boot was used on Fian.

Under this pressure they both admitted to travelling to a gathering of witches at the kirk in North Berwick (the remains of which stand by the harbour near the new seabird centre) having sailed out into the Forth in sieves. Geillies Duncan played a jew’s harp and sang while they danced widdershins around the church, the doors of which were then blown open and they entered to meet the devil. The devil apparently suggested that they should kiss his buttocks as a sign of loyalty (they were cold and hard), he then inveighed against the king as his greatest enemy (which no doubt pleased James) and ordered them to raise spells against him. To do this they dug up some corpses and ground the joints to powder and also threw a black cat (to which the limbs of a man had been stitched) into the sea.

We don’t have the record of John Fian’s confession, but his dittay (indictment) is interesting as it has many more of the elements we recognise from the continental records (and works like Malleus and Summis Disiderantes) and is more reflective and religious in tone. His position as school teacher would account for this greater level of education and literacy. Fian spoke of the devil carrying him through the air to “many mountains” and, apparently, travelled in spirit to the Sabbat - “soughing athwart the earth” - while his body lay in bed unlike the others who, more prosaically, rode or went on foot. At his execution, Fian is said to have recanted and claimed innocence.

James took an extraordinary interest in the trials and apparently interviewed the suspects himself. Initially sceptical (because witches must be liars), he was said to have been persuaded of the power of the witches by Agnes Sampson recounting what passed between him and Anne on their wedding night. Perhaps, again, we detect James’s unease with allegations against his virility and there is also the flattering suggestion that he is the devil’s greatest adversary.

At this stage, the trials become political.

Francis Hepburn Earl of Bothwell was the nephew Mary Queen of Scots third husband and cousin to James. James had left him as Lennox’s deputy while he was in Norway and in charge of the fleet. Bothwell was clever and cultured but also arrogant and violent - he had a tendency to indulge in feuds and in the course of one he murdered several members of the Hume family. This was not entirely uncommon for Scottish nobles of the period and kings had long found their most powerful subjects hard to contain. Unsurprisingly, Bothwell had enemies and they saw the witch trials as an opportunity to snare him. In April 1591, it was alleged that Agnes Sampson had implicated him in the plot to murder the king. By this point, Agnes was dead - she was strangled and burnt in January - so another accused, Ritchie Graham was persuaded to testify and two women of higher social status, Barbara Napier and Euphame MacCalzean were implicated (again through the post mortem testimony of Sampson) as they had plausible links to Bothwell. The allegations of treason and the use of image-magic to kill the king become more pronounced. MacCalzean was well connected in the legal world and she had many defenders, nevertheless, she was sentenced to be burned alive.

It is ironic that the allegation that the devil worked through women because of their weakness in order to destroy the king was also the modus operandi of Bothwell’s enemies. I have mentioned the men implicated in the trial, but overall they were in a substantial minority and all of a poorer class. Once the accusations began to affect those of higher status, it was naturally the women who were most at risk.

Bothwell escaped and the next couple of years saw the power balance between him and the king shift several times. On one occasion Bothwell mounted a successful coup and he gained an acquittal and recovered his confiscated estates. James eventually managed to oust him, drive him into permanent exile and persuade the presbytery to excommunicate him. He died a broken man in Italy.

Using allegations of witchcraft to discredit rivals was not a new thing (see, for example Eleanor Cobham, Duchess of Gloucester) and would continue to feature in future trials but this gained such a traction that many would come to believe that the witches had indeed gathered at the kirk at the behest of Bothwell and it would later be said that he attended in person disguised as the devil with the bare buttocks.

For James, the event solidified many of his views of kingship as an office ordained by God. He wrote Demonology which becomes a standard witch-finder text in the British isles. In it, he harks back to the testimony of Fian when he speaks of witches “being carried by the force of the Spirit… either above the earth or above the sea”. He also says that there are 20 female witches for one man and gives the reason “that sex is frailer than man is, so it is easier to be entrapped in those gross snares of the devil, as was over-proved to be true by the serpent’s deceiving of Eva”. On ascending to the throne in England, James brought in harsher punishments for witchcraft: the mere act would now carry a hanging sentence whereas before this was reserved for murder by magic. Yet, for all this, James considered himself a rational man and many in his new kingdom like Reginald Scott were deeply sceptical of witches, arguing that to overstate their power reduced God’s. James also drew a line between attacks upon the Royal house (which were naturally dealt with harshly) and those between his subjects when he enjoyed acting as the impartial, wise judge. In fact, he had in his day a reputation for using his expertise to expose fraud in cases of witch-trials and he intervened to save several witches in Leicester as well as taking a great interest in debunking the case of Anne Gunter.

I think, perhaps, most crucially James and the Church of England didn’t need witches to the extent that he and the Kirk had done in Scotland. That is what is so fascinating and horrific: the death of women as a major political tool.

2rebecca · 18/08/2018 19:21

Loving the lessons on witches. I have 4 books on witchcraft (worried my current husband when I set them up on the bookshelf when we moved in together!) A mix of history of witchcraft history and a bonkers one on "mastering witchcraft with actual spells and chants in it. I studied herbal medicine as well as normal medicine and at one point was the only NHS herbalist in Scotland hence the fascination.

Alicethroughtheblackmirror · 18/08/2018 20:20

I should add that some accounts are even more graphic about the tortures that the accused were put to - fixed to walls with the scold's bridle or having pins driven under the finger nails. I'm not sue that we can ascribe these specifically, but they were definitely in use at the time. It would mean that these poor souls really were a bloody mess when they came to trial and execution.

Ereshkigal · 18/08/2018 20:44

She was very little when her Mother was beheaded, so I doubt she had clear memories of her, but you can bet your life she was told all about it, and was given a very clear understanding that her life was Henry's, to do with as he wished.

Yes, she was tiny when Anne was executed but also she then had the examples of her father's behaviour to all his subsequent wives as she grew from a 2 year old into a precocious teenager. Including another beheading.

Alicethroughtheblackmirror · 18/08/2018 20:53

Yes, Ereshkigal, Elizabeth was extremely precocious. We know that she questioned her servants about why she was no longer "princess" but "lady" immediately after her mother's execution. She avoided mentioning her as queen (unlike Mary who constantly sought to rehabilitate her mother and the legitimacy of her marriage) perhaps because she knew that would expose a weakness. But she wore a ring with her mother's image and favoured her mother's family.

sociopathsunited · 18/08/2018 21:43

She must have been terrified for most of her childhood and teens. I know she was fond of Jane, who appears to have tried to reunite Fat Henry with his "illegitimate" daughters. I doubt Anne of Cleve's or Katherine aHowatrd made much of an impression on her (one not there long enough, the other young and flighty) but she was supposed to be very close to Catherine Parr. Despite Parr outliving Henry, she came very close to losing her head over her religious views, and being outspoken and passionate about them (an outspoken woman, how dare she?). I believe she was lucky to avoid the block, and lucky that henry finally popped his clogs when he did. Elizabeth was taught very well that the only way she would stay in power was to remain unmarried and childless. Die in childbirth, die for not producing a boy, die for holding opinions, die for loving someone else before Henry even knew you existed. No wonder Elizabeth said stuff that for a game of soldiers.

Ereshkigal · 18/08/2018 21:46

Yes it was such a precarious existence for her.

LangCleg · 19/08/2018 09:25

georgiebc.wordpress.com/2014/05/01/witches-and-how-they-are-silenced/

This is an interesting and wide-raging article about the witch trope by Heather Marsh of Wikileaks and Anonymous fame. I like Heather's writing - I agree with lots, disagree with a bit and always find something to challenge my thinking.

bluescreen · 21/08/2018 07:26

I had to look up the boot and wish I hadn't. I'm sure I'd say anything to avoid torture like that.

Fascinating thread - thank you all.

sociopathsunited · 21/08/2018 15:08

The press is pretty horrific too. I guess they all are. I inwardly shudder when someone tells them "I'm afraid I'll have to press you for an answer".

The press was basically a person laid out on the floor or a hard surface, with a small stone or stick under their lower spine. A board was then laid on top of them, and successively heavier stones or weights were then put onto the board (assuming the person refused to give the answers the torturer wanted). Eventually the person's spine was broken by the stick/stone under their back, or they were crushed to death. Apparently the thought of it was enough for some people to say whatever their jailers wanted to hear.

Alicethroughtheblackmirror · 21/08/2018 15:57

Yup, they had petty twisted imaginations when it came to torture...

Socio, yes, the press was disgusting: it was usually reserved for cases where an individual refused to plead guilty or not guilty. It may seem odd that they wouldn't but do so, but sometimes if they were found guilty their estates were forfeit and their children would be disinherited. I think they shoved in a very unhistorical version in the recent TV series on the gunpowder plot. I believe they based it on the case of Margaret Clitherow, a Catholic who was accused of harbouring priests in Elizabethan York. To compound everything, Margaret had been pregnant at the time. Elizabeth herself was, in fairness, horrified when she found out.

Back to witches and possibly the most famous case is Giles Corey (because of The Crucible). He's the only recorded case in the US.

FloraFox · 21/08/2018 16:11

This is a fascinating thread. In case there was any doubt about men shutting down gender critical women, our reliable internet doctor has spelled it out.

Witch hunts and gender-critical feminists
sociopathsunited · 21/08/2018 16:32

Isn't that the Disney witch from Snow White? I bet good old, friendly and not remotely litigious Walt Disney Inc would be interested in the adorable Dr using their trademarked and copyright protected imagery for his own nefarious purposes.....

Alicethroughtheblackmirror · 21/08/2018 16:33

Oh dear! Adrian, Adrian! Over here! Would you like to learn why using tired cliches of witches to back up your 'argument' marks you out as a misogynist terrified of female expressions of power or a deeply unpleasant sadist who enjoys seeing women suffer?

Or maybe you know that and don't really care, in which case you could just get some cool torture ideas and bang on about what great guys Kramer and Sprenger must have been.

I'd be so embarrassed for him if I cared.

sociopathsunited · 21/08/2018 16:38

Don't worry Alice. The tongue of newt and eye of toad in bat's blood has just about come to a boil. All I need to do is add the powdered devil's hoof and we're good to go. Broomsticks at the ready, gals!

Alicethroughtheblackmirror · 21/08/2018 16:49

Excellent, I have my Mr Potato Head ready made up with owlish glasses and smug grin so we can stick the pins in. Just slightly (but only slightly) worried that I might give Michael Gove a migraine instead...

sociopathsunited · 21/08/2018 17:06

Meh. If we get two with one potato head, consider it a bonus.

Alicethroughtheblackmirror · 21/08/2018 17:21

🤣🤣🤣
You know that bit in Raiders of the Lost Ark when the nazi with the glasses gets his face melted? If I make the image out of wax and hold it to a candle, is that what we'd get?

Alicethroughtheblackmirror · 21/08/2018 17:55

Anyway, I was going to say something serious and convoluted about the Spanish Inquisition.

And just in case our favourite (non)witch-doctor/ terf-finder general/ Duke Maximilian of Bavaria tribute act pops by, obviously I'm not making wax images out of Adrian because:
a) witches aren't real and while we're at it neither is the gender fairy (I know, I know).
b) I'm not a violent unhinged nutter on Twatter so I don't get off on the idea of hurting people.
c) I haven't got any wax.

And now you can, at some point, expect the Spanish Inquisition.

sociopathsunited · 21/08/2018 18:21

^Whispers ....

When I take a tick off one of the cats or dogs.....I drop the vile creature in to an old tealight tin case and I melt a candle so that it drips onto it, encasing it in solidifying wax, just in case it crawls away and sinks its nasty wee jaws into something else^

Shameful, I know, but they freak me out. Those fat grey bodies and the one end with all the wiggling, wriggling legs and bitey bits......ewwwwww.

Alicethroughtheblackmirror · 21/08/2018 18:26

That is creepily satisfying and they are properly evil...