Better Statcounter

Sunday, July 2, 2023

Book-It '23! Book #21: "Witches, Sluts, Feminists" by Kristen J. Sollée

 PLEASE REMEMBER I HAVE A FAQ POST NOW AND THANK YOU FOR LEAVING A COMMENT IF YOU'RE READING! LOVE AND THANKS TO ALL MY READERS!

The all new 50 Books Challenge!



Title: Witches, Sluts, Feminists: Conjuring the Sex Positive by Lidia Pradas

Details: Copyright 2017, ThreeL Media | Stone Bridge Press

Synopsis (By Way of Back Cover): "Witch, Slut, Feminist: these contested identities are informing millennial women as they counter a tortuous history of misogyny with empowerment. This innovative primer highlights sexual liberation as it traces the lineage of “witch feminism”. Juxtaposing scholarly research on the demonization of women and female sexuality that has continued since the witch hunts of the early modern era with pop occulture analyses and interviews with activists, artists, scholars, and practitioners of witchcraft, this book greatly enriches our current conversations about reproductive rights, sexual pleasure, queer identity, pornography, sex work, and more.

TRACING THE LINEAGE OF "WITCH FEMINISM"

"Informative and irreverent, Kristen Sollée's Witches, Sluts, Feminists is a wonderfully wild flight through herstory. This tome is a fit that celebrate female power, with all of its danger and delight." -- Pam Grossman, curator, teacher of magical practice, and author of What is a Witch

"Ages before the most qualified presidential candidate in history was called a 'nasty woman', women were long vilified for their power, intelligence, and prowess-- except they were called witches. To understand the current misogynistic political climate-- and to learn how women wickedly weathered these storms before-- look no further than this book." -- Alex Berg, producer and host at
The Huffington Post

"For the first time in my life I felt like I was reading about a history that I was actually a part of." -- Jacqueline Frances, author of
The Beaver Show and Striptastic!"



Why I Wanted to Read It: The last few years have been big for Witch books, of Witches of all kinds.


How I Liked It:
CONTENT WARNING! THIS BOOK COVERS SEXUAL ASSAULT, RACISM, SEXISM, HOMOPHOBIA, TRANSPHOBIA, RAPE CULTURE, POLICE BRUTALITY, MURDER, AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND THE REVIEW MAKES MENTION OF THAT. PLEASE PROCEED ACCORDINGLY.


So! You've got a great idea for a book. And it is a great idea! But there's just one problem. You've got to execute it. What can go wrong from the planning/concept stage to the final product? Just about anything.

But first! This book is a series of chapters largely (but not entirely) wandering in and out of the pop culture and politics of 2017 and how they relate to the concept of the witch (NOTE: AS ALWAYS, FOR THE SPECIFIC SPIRITUAL/RELIGIOUS PRACTICE I GIVE "W" IN WITCH A CAPITAL LETTER SAME AS THE "P" IN PAGANISM; FOR USE OF THE ARCHETYPE OR "GENERAL MAGIC-MAKER", I GIVE A LOWER CASE W.) and the slut. Everything from Election '16 to pop culture witches to witch fashion and much more, the author seeks to make note of nearly everywhere "witch" was having an influence and why and how the figure of the witch correlates to the figure of the "slut" and the misogyny that runs through and conjoins both of these archetypes.

Before I dig in, it's important to note that starting in the late 2010s, both Witches and witches experienced a significant increase of interest, in no small part due to the political movements that rose and strengthened in response to the horrifyingly rightward turn in the world, mostly the election of the 45th President of the United States, but also world events like Brexit. People feeling a lack of power and the rise in bigoted rhetoric made a perfect storm for a movement. While Witches have been gaining in popularity and understanding since the 1980s and 1990s (the latter, especially), this has been the most recent boost and it's still a significant force into the 2020s. But it's important to remember that history (particularly that Witches were popular before the late 2010s) when considering this book.

The author makes her mission statement early on:

Witches, Sluts, Feminists: Conjuring the Sex Positive is an introduction to the sex-positive history of the witch. With a focus on sexual liberation, this book traces the lineage of "witch feminism" through art, film, music, fashion, literature, technology, religion, pop culture, and politics. It delves into reproductive rights, sexual pleasure, pornography, queer identity, body positivity, and sex work, and demonstrates why the "slut" is in many ways the "witch" of the twenty-first century. (pgs 8 and 9)



My hackles are already up a little. But okay. I'm willing to be convinced.

And then

Although many men and those on the masculine spectrum identify as witches and have historically been accused of witchcraft, this book specifically looks at the indivisible links between the witch, femininity, and womanhood-- which includes trans women and anyone on the feminine spectrum-- and the persecution women have faced as a result of their perceived connection with witchcraft. Witches, Sluts, Feminists thus explores the witch as an identity forced upon women, as an identity taken up freely by feminine individuals, and as an embodiment of those who practice witchcraft-- an umbrella term for a variety of occult practices. (pg 9)



While I'm glad the book is staying trans and nonbinary inclusive (as everything should, but especially a book about feminism), that's... not quite an accurate statement about the term witchcraft, and when you're covering a loaded topic such as witchcraft, and into the depth that this book goes, you can clarify some of the meanings which are a lot more than just "an umbrella term for occult practices". Witchcraft is a word with many meanings, as I've said, and one of those is spiritual/religious. Witchcraft (and yes, I mean Witchcraft specifically, not Wicca) is a religion to many, including me. I've gone into the history before (and recently) so I won't again.

I singled out this passage because it's so emblematic of the book: a clear great intention and a weak execution with varying levels of accuracy.

The book weaves in and out of various topics, as I said, but manages to get a factual inaccuracy or sloppiness or just plain style over substance of them all (and we'll get to some of them). I wondered in my last review if I don't take into account my own biases in reading more: I've been reading about feminism, Witchcraft, and pop culture (and all three together) for a long, long time. Would this be a good book for someone not very schooled in any of those things and looking to learn more? Given the misinformation and sloppiness of it (not to mention some stances and choices by the author), not really. It does approach a few interesting angles and situations and talk to several interesting people and that's where it hits again that this could be so much better.

Because a well-written book exploring the links between feminism and the figures of the slut and the witch, particularly how they pertained to this particular point in history would be fascinating and a valuable resource. Exploring the late 2010s-on Witch phenomenon and where it came from, what it is, and where it's going would be fascinating in and of itself to probe.

But as it is, at best we have a jumping off point (maybe) for better information and perhaps a bit of cultural ephemera. And what a pity, because the concept of this book was amazing, and far exceeded its execution.



Notable: So let's talk about generational buzzwords and what we need to stop doing. I'm going to ask that if you use a generational term (be it "Greatest Generation", "Silent Generation", "Boomer", "Gen-Xer", "Millennial", "Gen-Z", or "Gen Alpha"), have it matter. Do you actually mean people born (and only those people) in a certain time? Or do you mean "teenagers", "people in their twenties", or "retirees"? Generational terms exist for a reason and people need to stop throwing them around.

In 2017, clearly, the term was "Millennial", which, reminder, describes roughly people born between 1980 and 2000 (no, I do not use the 1990s cut-off; the new century, the end of the Modern Era of Prosperity in 2000, and 9/11 are too distinct as generational markers):

Like many millennial women, I see a reclamation of female power in the witch, slut, and feminist identities. (pg 7)



Citation needed. I mean, I really would like to see a source for this on women born between 1980-2000 and this particular topic. And not Gen-X women? Not Baby Boomer women? I realize the author is herself a Millennial (as she identifies with this statement) but that's something else we have to unpack. Are you doing something because you're a "Millennial" or are you doing it because this is something popular at this point in time with many people, not just your particular generation?


While engaging in the movement for gender equality, more and more millennial feminists are engaging in ritual, trying out tarot, studying herbalism, and following the primordial cycles of the waxing and waning moon. (pg 14)



Again, citation needed. And again, only Millennial women?


Millennials are the first native digital generation to have grown up online, and because the internet is divested from nature— from sunrise and sunset and the seasons to the waxing and waning moon— some have responded with increased investment in the earth. As a new wave of interest in the witch rises, information on nature-based practices is proliferating. There are social media hubs where you can learn how to use ritual to heal from trauma, how to use sex magic to achieve desired goals, and how to harness the power of natural objects for a variety of purposes. Many of these witchcraft practices are rooted in ancient— and even historically secretive— traditions, but are now available to the masses in digital grimoires. (pg 139)



Now this is one use of Millennial where it's actually properly used. Yes, this is something distinct to the Millennial generation. The internet started becoming widely used by the public in the 1990s. _________________________________________________________________________________________


The author makes some really troubling additions to the book, and seems to sense that these choices are not going to be popular, with an observation early on:

A commitment to intersectionality is non-negotiable when approaching any feminist herstory. I have endeavored to include the perspectives of a broad cross-section of feminists within these pages. I also recognize that many beloved feminist figures were/are flawed individuals. My inclusion of a particular activist, scholar, or artist does not reflect a rubber stamp of approval for their entire oeuvre, but merely affirms their role in the story of witches, sluts, and feminists. (pg 9)



(A quick note: since I read Inga Muscio's Cunt: a Declaration of Independence, I've come to loathe the term "herstory" when history just looks like "Hi, story!" to me.)

Here's the thing about including someone historically troublesome, though (and I've made this point before): when we made space for someone like Susan B Anthony all of those years, we were taking space away from women like Ida B Wells. Similarly, and more relevant to the style of this book, when you decide to omit the treacherous things they've done, particularly when this is someone still alive and/or in recent history, in order to "affirm their role in the story of witches, sluts, and feminists", you're unintentionally helping cover up what they've done and are doing.

As radical feminist Mary Daly rhapsodizes in the 1980 introduction to a reprint of [famous feminist organizer Matilda Jocelyn] Gage's book: "Gage's method is not merely chronological but Crone-lgoical." (See what she did there?) (pg 52)



Mary Daly was a particularly vile trans exclusionary radical "feminist" who supervised the production of the disgusting 1979 book The Transsexual Empire by fellow TERF Janice Raymond (still alive, still a transphobic bigot, and also anti-sex worker, an anathema to this book in particular). And again, lest you think "Oh, a product of their times!" Raymond is still alive and Daly died in 2010. Even an acknowledgement of Daly's awfulness and how her work helped pave the way for the violent anti-trans legislation today as well as her racist attitudes (Audre Lord took her to task for her omissions of women of color in her work) would help in this case.


In 2015, rapper Azealia Banks announced her witch identity to the world on Twitter, saying: “I’m really a witch... The most magical people are the ones who have to deal with oppression, because the non-magical are jealous.” Banks came out of the broom closet more publicly than any witch before her, perhaps revealing an increasing acceptance of witch-identified women— at least when they happen to be famous musicians.
(pg 127 and 128)



I looked up to see when Azealia Banks's notorious transphobia (that appears to be a particular obsession) started and while a cursory search didn't provide anything any earlier than the 2020s (so thus it couldn't be mentioned in this book), she'd already had several disgusting homophobic outbursts when this book was written (Banks is bisexual and used the f-slur as an insult on several public occasions, along with other homophobia) and then there's the fact she openly supported the 45th President, took it back, and then took back her take-back. Her "witch" shtick doesn't appear to be anything else other than yet another grab for attention. So she's really not worth a mention "in the story of witches, sluts, and feminists".
_________________________________________________________________________________________________


If you thought that was a troubling step in feminism, there's more to come, unfortunately.

For the purposes of this book, feminism is, as author and social activist bell hooks defines it, "a movement to end sexism, sexist exploitation, and oppression." hooks intentionally does not name men as the root cause of this oppression, but rather gender stereotypes and sexist narratives-- which can be propagated by a person of any gender. (pg 15)



Yes, that's true, but I thought that was kind of an odd pull to take from the legendary feminist's work until I saw the author's usage of an unfortunate concept.

She reviews Maryse Condé's 1986 book I, Tituba: Black Witch of Salem:

In addition to questioning the ways witchcraft is viewed at the time, Tituba is also confused why the white Puritan women she encounters are so emphatically sex-negative and misandrist.

In the face of her master’s wife’s prudery, she doubles down on her view of sex as healthy and pleasurable. “For me it’s the most beautiful act in the world,” Tituba exclaims, while Goodwife Parris responds in horror, “Be quiet! Be quiet! It’s Satan’s heritage in us.”

In the face of her friend and The Scarlett Letter alum Hester Prynne’s misandry, Tituba responds with open-heartedness to men, despite having been wronged by many of them. When Prynne mentions feminism to Tituba (in an ironic, anachronistic twist), she suggests that Tituba is too fond of sensual pleasures to identify with the philosophy. This can be viewed as both a critique of the misandrous and sex-negative threads within contemporary feminism, and Condé’s nod to the ambivalence some women of color have expressed toward a movement initially built to fight for the rights of white women alone.(pg 76)




She also muses over the 2015 film The Witch:

Erotic awakenings, misandrist fantasies, and a twist on classic cinematic tropes made Robert Eggers’ The Witch a breakout feminist favorite in 2016. (pg 115)




Whatever your view, The Witch does offer one ecstatic vision of an alternate universe for women to inhabit. A space to find sanctuary with other women unencumbered by God and patriarchy— a blood-soaked, clothing-optional, ladies-only occult paradise that’s the stuff of misandrist, separatist wet dreams. (pg 116)




That's a lot of "misandry"! If you aren't aware, this is one of those false-equivalencies that seeks to equate misandry to misogyny. This is a pretty troubling false equivalency, and you generally find it used by the sorts of folks that also love the terms "racist against white people" (or "reverse racism") and "heterophobia", all unironically used.

This term does not need to exist, and it certainly does not need to be used by a so-called feminist author. Do I think hating men as a whole (rather than the use of metonymy like "I hate it when men tell women to smile!") is ridiculous and often speaks to plenty of unexamined privileges and biases, particularly when it's perpetuated by TERFs oblivious to their own privilege? I sure do. Do I think we need to use a ridiculous false equivalency in what's purportedly a feminist book rather than saying "man-hating" or "man-bashing" (and is "misandry" even appropriate? We're talking about women in centuries past who would've been the property of their husbands, not TERF scum like Mary Daly advocating for a reduction of the male population in the late 1990s, which yes, is a real thing she did)? Absolutely not. Do better.


Also on the "did you need to do that front", the author covers the controversial "SlutWalk" phenomenon of the early 2010s:

“I’ve been told I’m not supposed to say this… . [W]omen should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized,” said a Toronto police officer in 2011, inspiring the first SlutWalk.

Although the SlutWalk movement is about far more than a woman’s clothing style, a comment about clothing provided the spark for the movement to catch fire. As the founders of SlutWalk Toronto Heather Jarvis and Sonya Barnett expressed in their 2011 manifesto: “We are tired of being oppressed by slut-shaming; of being judged by our sexuality and feeling unsafe as a result. Being in charge of our sexual lives should not mean that we are opening ourselves to an expectation of violence, regardless if we participate in sex for pleasure or work. No one should equate enjoying sex with attracting sexual assault.” (pg 106)




To combat the contemporary epidemic of slut-shaming, victim-blaming, and sexual assault, Rose has hosted multiple SlutWalks in Los Angeles. Originating in 2011 in Toronto, the SlutWalk movement was inspired by one police officer's comment that women could avoid harassment and assault if they stopped "dressing like sluts." Since then, SlutWalks have been held all over the world, from Rio de Janeiro to New Delhi, with varied success in highlighting issues of race, class, gender identity, and sexual orientation within the discourse on sexual assault.

As a queer woman of color who grew up poor, Amber Rose's involvement with the SlutWalk has arguably helped to deflect its designation away from that of a straight, middle-class white women's movement. Whatever critiques have been leveled at the SlutWalk, however, its global impact in challenging rape culture is undeniable. (pg 29 and 30)




Except missing in this is that the SlutWalks were rightly criticized by many feminists of color at the time, especially Black feminists who pointed out that "slut" was a white privilege to reclaim ("GoddessWalks" became organized by many Black feminists instead) given the increased sexualization women of color face.

This should be something of which the author is well-familiar, as she offers in a section about opposition to reclaiming the term "slut" in general (not in reference to SlutWalks specifically, which have the added intensity of the sexual violence):

There are also some women of color who contest the ways white women use the word “slut” because of their experiences being cast as promiscuous for merely existing in a racist world. Dr. Carolyn West explains that since the early days of the slave trade in America, the “jezebel” archetype— a racialized version of “slut”— has “branded Black women as sexually promiscuous and immoral” and has been used to “rationalize” a host of atrocities committed against them.

Writer and activist Lutze B. invokes this legacy of misogynoir when discussing her resistance to the term “slut” in Salon: “In order for me to claim my right to be a ‘slut,’ I first must win the battle to be able to fully
claim my humanity…. As a black woman, I won’t be concerned with reclaiming my inner ‘slut’ until white women show more interest in being in solidarity with me.” (pg 81)



Just another example of the book's sloppiness.
__________________________________________________________________________________


Concurrently, feminism is a buzz word for the first time in decades. Pop stars are proclaiming their allegiance to gender equality on stage, actors are broaching political issues on the red carpet, and activists, politicians, educators, and everyday people alike are fighting for women's rights online, in the classroom, and in the streets. (pg 13)




This is nonsense. Feminism has been a buzz word for decades. The 1990s had the Spice Girls and the introduction of "Girl Power" (a phenomenon which feminists had some feelings about at the time) and while feminism and other progressive movements certainly got a boost of action from the election and Presidency of the 45th President, it built upon preexisting structures.


Similarly, the author browsing witch wares at store has thoughts:

Thanks to the burgeoning popularity of witches, you, too, can adorn yourself in the dark, seductive trappings of sorcery. Like punk, many once marginalized movements are now fodder for the marketplace. As the cultural sphere is gobbled up by the consumer sphere at warp speed, American hypercapitalism has rendered rebellion an act often performed via spending habits. Although it may be in style to sport the phrase “Witch, Please” on your beanie or to wear a velvet hooded cape in a bid to cloak yourself in occult feminine power, consumers may also be supporting sweatshops overseas that treat female garment workers like slaves or enabling practices that pollute the environment in the process. (pg 131)



Mass-produced witch (and Witch) merchandise popping up in the mainstream has been a occurrence for decades, so much it was a line in one of my favorite books of all time, Richard Grant's In the Land of Winter in 1997.
___________________________________________________________________________


As a new wave of feminism floods both IRL and URL spaces to campaign for women's rights, exploring alternative avenues for liberation often goes hand in hand with exploring alternative philosophies and spirituality. (pg 14)



I've pretty much given up at this point trying to get people to see that online spaces are a part of real life (and you're interacting with real people) and we really need to stop saying "IRL" when what we really mean is "in person". You'd kind of think that someone who by their own description is part of the generation that grew up online would comprehend that.
___________________________________________________________________________


There's also a fantastical description [in the misogynist 1486 witch-hunting manifesto The Malleus Maleficarum] of witches stealing penises and keeping them as pets in a bird's nest with other lonely, disembodied penises that crawl amongst each other and feast on a diet of corn and oats. (You can't make this stuff up.) (pg 24)




Yes, this is a real thing. Look it up if you dare.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________


To be a slut doesn't require being a sex worker, a nude selfie-taker, or a promiscuous woman. Jessica Valenti, author of Full Frontal Feminism: A Young Woman's Guide to Why Feminism Matters, sums up the definition of the "s-word" in the title of an article she wrote for The Guardian called "What makes a slut? The only rule, it seems, is being female." (pg 28)



This is important because the word "slut" is a nebulous term. Does it mean someone who has sex with a lot of different people? But even people who haven't had sex with anyone are called sluts. Does it mean dressing a certain way? The way you dress does not actually correlate to your sex life. Indeed, its nebulousness is a part of why the word is so useful in misogyny.
_______________________________________________________________________________________


I've complained about a lot, so credit to what the author gets right.

When reviewing a comedy sketch by comedian Amy Schumer about the Salem Witch Trials, the author notes something about which long-time readers have heard me complain:

Although the sketch is light on historical facts-- there were no witch burnings in Salem, and the women put on trial were not known sex workers-- it cuts to the core ideology behind many witch persecutions: a belief in the inherent wickedness of women. (pg 32)



I appreciate that fact that witch-burning is for once properly contextualized.


Originally, "suffragette" was coined as term of derision for suffragists, but some women's voting rights advocates reclaimed the term and wore it with pride. (pg 48)



Another massive irritant, since people use "suffragette" without thinking about it all the time.
_____________________________________________________________________________________


The author explores our cultural fascination with the Salem Witch Trials:

Although the European witch hunts saw thousands of deaths and aren't commonly included in American history textbooks, Salem saw fewer than fifty deaths, yet most students learn something about the Salem trials in school. This is arguably due to a dash of American cultural myopia, the phenomenon's allegorical function, and the draw of popular art and literature spun from Salem's legacy. (pg 33)



Pulitzer Prize-winning author Stacy Schiff collected a list of causes in her 2015 book The Witches: Suspicion, Betrayal, and Hysteria in 1692 Salem. She writes: "Our first true-crime story has been attributed to generational, sexual, economic, ecclesiastical, and class tensions; regional hostilities imported from England; food poisoning; a hothouse religion in a col climate; teenage hysteria; fraud, taxes, conspiracy; political instability; trauma induced by Indian attacks; and to witchcraft itself." (pg 34)



It's interesting (if not entirely accurate) to think of the Salem Witch Trials as our first true-crime story. I say not entirely accurate because Columbus was the first true crime story.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________


It remains to be seen just how far the Trump/Pence administration will roll back reproductive freedoms. (pg 43)



This line is particularly painful in 2023. Stacking the Supreme Court with Federalist Society liars and ideologues that tore down nearly half a century of reproductive rights is the answer (so far).
____________________________________________________________________________________


Formed in the new millennium, The Satanic Temple is a nontheistic organization dedicated to Satanic practice and the promotion of Satanic rights. They view Satan as the "Eternal Rebel against arbitrary authority," but do not worship Satan as a deity. Instead, TST uses its status as a religion to enact political change and "to encourage benevolence and empathy among all people, reject tyrannical authority, advocate practical common sense, and promote justice." Over the past few years, they have worked tirelessly for feminist issues such as reproductive rights, LGBTQ rights, and the separation of church and state. (pg 46)



The Satanic Temple's national, four-part series marked a new visibility for the witch as a political icon. (pg 47)



I appreciate defining for those who don't know what the Satanic Temple does (and doesn't) do, but I'm still a Witch who likes my Witchcraft as free from Abrahamic religion as possible, and that includes their concepts like Satan.
_____________________________________________________________________________________


Known for her passionate oratory skills, Sojourner Truth was born into slavery but escaped to become a renowned abolitionist and women's rights activist. Despite not being able to read or write, she published an account of her life to sell so she could support herself, and once won a $125 award from a libel case against a newspaper that published a story calling her a witch. Although Truth did not take kindly to that term at the time, historian Nell Irvin Planter argues that Truth's syncretic spiritual practice, which blended West African animistic beliefs, American folk magic, and Dutch Calvinism and Methodism does make her a witch in the contemporary sense of the word.

Truth's impassioned "Ain't I a Woman" speech at the Ohio Women's Convention in 1851 vocalized the painful realities of racism and sexism that she experienced throughout her life. Long before the dawn of intersectional feminism, Sojourner Truth declared that the fight for women's rights must take women of color into account. (pg 50)



White woman Frances Dana Barker Gage, described as an abolitionist although she absolutely clung to some white supremacist tendencies (just because you want slavery abolished doesn't mean you believe Black people are human beings), rewrote Truth’s famous speech to be more stereotypically “Southern slave” when Truth was actually from New York and spoke only Dutch until she was nearly ten (so she absolutely didn't sound the way Gage transcribes) and absolutely did not use the phrase “Ain’t I A Woman?” You can compare the actual speech and Gage's embarrassing racist mangling here. NO mention of Sojourner Truth or her speech is appropriate without that important point.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________


Matilda Joslyn Gage embraced a reclamation of the divine feminine as her spiritual practice, and is the first known suffragist to reclaim the word "witch". An abolitionist who purportedly offered up her home as part of the Underground Railroad, Gage was also a dedicated campaigner for women's rights. In 1893, she wrote Women, Church and State, a searing indictment of patriarchal religion and the collusion of church and state. Well over a century a later, her anti-clerical book barely seems dated, and stands as a witch-infused rallying cry for gender justice.

In its pages, Gage discusses Christian misogyny as it relates to the European witch trials and humanizes the persecuted witch, while providing inspiration for L. Frank Baum's characterization of Glinda in The Wonderful Wizard of Oz. As Baum's mother-in-law, the elder stateswoman of feminism had a major impact on his writing, says Matilda Joslyn Gage Foundation founding director Dr. Sally Roesch Wagner. Without Gage, witches might still be viewed as solely evil in popular culture.

Before reclaiming language and stigmatized figures was deemed a viable political tool, Gage was reassessing the legacy of the witch, actively working to challenge conceptions of the witch's role in history. In Gage's estimation, witches were not maleficent sorceresses, but women targeted by the Christian state. She theorizes that the word "witch" formerly signified a woman of superior knowledge," and her analysis of witch trials is in line with that of many contemporary feminists historians:

In looking at the history of witchcraft we see three striking points for consideration:

First: That women were chiefly accused.

Second: That men believing in women’s inherent wickedness, and understanding neither the mental nor the physical peculiarities of her being, ascribed all her idiosyncrasies to witchcraft.

Third: That the clergy inculcated the idea that woman was in league with the Devil, and that strong intellect, remarkable beauty, or unusual sickness were in themselves proof of this league.
(pg 54)



I originally was going to single this out questioning "Without Gage, witches might still be viewed as solely evil in popular culture" and arguing about other good sorceresses in literature pre-Oz (fairy godmothers and good fairies, for example) and whether they might be seen as witches, but then Oz is a huge cultural touchpoint and Glinda is explicitly described as a witch, but really? This is just a really fascinating historic fact about the origin of one of the most beloved Oz characters.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________


In detailing the misogyny Hillary Clinton suffered on the campaign trail, the author makes some troubling false equivalencies:

During the 2016 campaign, Republican nominee Donald Trump, his campaign surrogates, and his supporters called Clinton “Crooked Hillary.” She was a “bitch,” a “tramp,” and the “Wicked Witch of the Left” connected with “Lucifer”; she deserved to be lynched, locked up in chains, or executed in a firing line, they said. She was “Hildabeast Clinton,” a “nasty woman” out to destroy humanity with her “Vagenda of Manocide.” But in one of the most heated election seasons in decades, it was not only Republicans who vilified her.

Chanting in support of Democratic Socialist presidential candidate and Senator from Vermont Bernie Sanders in early 2016, some devotees transformed his campaign slogan “Feel the Bern” to “Bern the Witch” at rallies. One man even took it upon himself to create a “Bern the Witch” fundraiser on Sanders’ official website, which was eventually removed and criticized by the Sanders campaign after it was highlighted by an advocate for Clinton. (pg 57 and 58)



Seriously? This same Clinton supporter nonsense that Sanders (and his supporters) are/were the same as Trump? Or in any way really comparable?
You're talking about words that came out of the mouth of the candidate who, for just a few things, gave her a belittling, lasting nickname, promoted vile conspiracy theories about her and her family, advocated for violence from his followers, including gun violence, against both Clinton and all of his political opponents, and whose campaign gathered a press conference of women that had accused her husband of sexual misconduct, only to use them as political pawns to bat away his own admissions of sexual assault on audio. You're comparing that to a candidate who not only praised Clinton even when they were opponents and fully endorsed her nomination (and wept publicly went she lost) because a small strain of his supporters were not terribly original misogynists (and in no way indicative of most of his supporters)?


John Demos explains in The Enemy Within that the witch hunt as metaphor is “a mode (most often) of moral reproach.” You’ll find the label readily affixed when there appears to be “some allegation of subversive intent, of conspiratorial menace, of concealed betrayal.”

The phrase has most often been used to damn a genderless party, corporation, or group, whether it be the GOP’s witch hunt against Planned Parenthood, or the liberal media’s witch hunt against basically anyone in the GOP. In 2016, however, as Donald Trump, his advisors, and supporters declared Hillary Rodham Clinton a criminal in league with evil— and one who should be bound in chains and executed— the brutal gendered dimension of the historical witch hunts was reanimated in frightening new ways. And it only got worse as the election season wore on. (pg 59)



"the liberal media’s witch hunt against basically anyone in the GOP" Did I really just read that sentence? My head hurts.
________________________________________________________________________________


The day after Donald Trump’s inauguration, women— and witches— gathered in protest. In marches across America and around the world, millions showed up for women’s rights and social justice. Sign after sign alluding to witches and witchcraft were spotted by witch-identified activists and shared on social media. “We are the daughters of the witches you failed to burn,” announced one. “Brujas against racism, sexism, ableism, transphobia, homophobia, and billionaires with shitty grammar,” proclaimed another. (pg 62)



Rachel Yehuda is a researcher in the growing field of epigenetics, and has studied the effects of mass trauma on the offspring of survivors. Her work was discussed in Scientific American in an article detailing the ways descendants of Holocaust survivors have “different stress hormone profiles
than their peers,” including lower levels of cortisol, which helps the human body deal with stress.

The offspring of Holocaust survivors are less equipped than their parents were to deal with stress. In effect, the trauma their ancestors faced has compromised their coping mechanisms. Unlike mice, who adapted positively to their ancestors’ trauma, these humans did not.

The research is preliminary, but telling.

“If you are looking for it all to be logical and fall into place perfectly, it isn’t going to yet,” Yehuda explains. “We are just at the beginning of understanding this.”

Epigenetic studies have also explored intergenerational trauma in Native American populations, and in those who have survived sexual abuse. Sociologist Dr. Daron T. Smith has written about the effects of intergenerational trauma on the African American descendants of slaves.

“The science of epigenetics is unlocking significant clues as to how racial discrimination can induce changes to the expression of certain genes linked to biological development and the existence of disease,” he wrote in The Huffington Post. “These epigenetic changes can linger for a lifetime and can potentially be transmitted to offspring.”

In response to thousands of women harassed, tortured, or murdered for supposedly practicing witchcraft, is it possible that their relatives, too, retain a trace of this trauma?

Feminist author Starhawk theorizes that the brutal history of witch hunting “remains with us today as a wound in the collective psyche.” Following epigenetic theory, could this trauma have snaked its way into an accused witch descendant’s DNA?

How many of us are the granddaughters of the witches they could not burn? (pg 149)



Number one, comparing oppressions that way makes me uncomfortable.
For two, PUT DOWN THAT PHRASE! "We are the granddaughters of the witches you couldn't burn" not only reinforces ahistorical witch-burning (witches were not burned in England or the colonies) but it shows you're not really thinking about the phrase. "Witches they couldn't burn" (or prosecute, as the case may be) were privileged in some way, and sometimes just stupidly lucky (and sometimes both). If you want to claim yourself as a lineage of the oppressed (generally by misogyny), you ARE the descendants of the witches they absolutely did indeed burn (or oppress). It's such an asinine phrase and hearing it used in comparison with the Holocaust, Native genocide, and US chattel slavery is incredibly irresponsible. ________________________________________________________________________________


What’s occurring now, with the fourth wave of feminism crashing, is that many female artists are using occult images, ritual gestures, and witch iconography to not only connect to the divine, but to continue to make space for themselves in a field which is still dominated by men. They’re utilizing herbs, candles, ceremonial garb, and goddess imagery, and mashing it up with digital treatments and modern technology. As such,
they’re turning themselves into witches: women who create things and shift perception, who trust their intuition, and who have the power to change the world. Their work is spiritual and political at the same time. (pgs 67 and 68)



The wave structure of feminism is inherently flawed, as it prioritizes white and privileged women and overlooks the feminism of women of color, but it has some value as a basic organizational structure. I do wonder who gets to call it when a wave happens, though.
________________________________________________________________________________


It brings to mind the Sandra Bland case, how she was stopped and beaten basically for being a strong black woman. Her arrest, what happened in her jail cell, and the suppression of evidence that ensued are no different in content and context than the groping and assassination of the victims of the Salem witch trials. Bland supposedly hanged herself, but she was taller than the ledge from which she allegedly hanged. (pg 72)



"Strong black woman" is a term that originated in slavery, to indicate that Black women weren't really human, and could tolerate inhuman levels of pain. It's something that persists today in medical trauma (sometimes resulting in death) suffered by Black women. Sandra Bland wasn't murdered because she was a "strong Black woman", she was murdered because she was a Black woman period.
_______________________________________________________________________________


Although women of color have historically faced increased rates of sexual assault, sexual stigma, police brutality, and poverty, mainstream feminism has not addressed these issues adequately. In 1993, Kimberlé Crenshaw coined what would become third- and fourth-wave feminism’s central theory, intersectionality, to name the racist sexism and sexist racism that women of color encounter (pg 76 and 77)



Intersectionality is primarily about the intersection of racism and sexism, but it's also about the intersection of all oppressions (a Black trans woman has a different experience than a Black cis woman, a white cis lesbian has different oppression than a white trans lesbian, et cetera).
________________________________________________________________________________


Author of I Am Not a Slut: Slut-Shaming in the Age of the Internet Leora Tanenbaum has studied the term [slut] and its usage for over two decades, and she is an outspoken advocate of obliterating it from our vocabularies. In an interview with The Guardian Tanenbaum revealed that some of the girls she interviewed for her books try to repurpose “slut”, but end up “losing control of the label when their peers turn it against them”— with some even experiencing sexual assault as a result. (pg 81)



I haven't read that book but blaming someone's sexual assault on them for any reason, let alone their reclaiming a word used against them is disgusting.
________________________________________________________________________________


The author tackles the nuances of sex work and how it correlates to the figure of the witch.

At the nexus of the witch and slut identities is sex work. Some women who choose to work in the sex industry— as strippers, porn performers, dominatrixes— see their practice as part of a lineage of healers tapping into taboo female power. (pg 93)



I'm reminded of what Amanda Yates Garcia said about sex work.


In the twenty-first century, however, this work is roundly maligned. Sex workers in America are four hundred times more likely to be murdered on the job than other workers, and women of color and trans women are disproportionately affected by this violence. According to statistics released by the Sex Workers Outreach Project in 2015, 41 percent of sex workers killed were black, and 29 percent were transgender. Sex work remains criminalized in the United States, and those seeking respite from abuse via police intervention can therefore be arrested, sexually assaulted, or coerced into providing their services to escape punishment.

It’s important to emphasize that not all sex workers have the luxury of choosing their profession, and that not all view it uncritically. Regardless of the nuanced factors that motivate each individual to enter and stay in the
industry, however, sex workers are persecuted both by the patriarchal authorities and by the feminist narratives that conflate sex work with sex trafficking.

Just as women who defied the sexual status quo were once persecuted as witches, sex workers are persecuted for using their bodies to survive and even thrive in a culture that still has not granted complete bodily autonomy
to women. (pg 94)




Sex workers turn up in Witchcraft, as well:

The sacred whore is an archetype found in both myths and historical documents. Her particulars are a continued source of scholarly debate. Evidence of the sacred whore can be found in The Code of Hammurabi, the Babylonian laws from c. 1754 BC that spell out special protections for temple prostitutes, and in Greek historian Herodotus’ fifth-century BC Histories, which include a disdainful mention of sex rituals occurring at the temple of Ishtar, the goddess of fertility, love, war, and sex.

Mesopotamian, Syrian, and Hebrew texts also link terms for sacred women with prostitution. Some suggest these links prove the sacred whore’s primacy. Others say it’s an error of translation. (pg 95)


________________________________________________________________________________


But despite the important work of these women and others like them, sexual stigma persists.

In a historical first, President Obama spoke out about this omnipresent issue, addressing the sexual double standards that have plagued women since well before the witch trials.

“We need to change the attitude that punishes women for their sexuality,” he said during the 2016 White House Summit on the United States of Women, “but gives men a pat on the back for theirs.” A month later, the president outed himself as a feminist in an article he wrote for Glamour magazine, doubling down on his previous proclamation.

For the most prominent and powerful American politician to take issue with deep rooted, sexual oppression— and to call himself a feminist- was revolutionary. At a time when countless politicians are looking to silence the gains made by feminism and to keep female sexuality and female sexual health in the dark ages, this statement had impact. Given the dramatic shift in America’s leadership since then, it’s difficult to know just how much this view will be undermined and actively suppressed. But it was nevertheless a hopeful moment that will not soon be forgotten, full of possibility, for witches, sluts, and feminists everywhere (pgs 101 and 102)



Remember that late 2010s nostalgia. You can see the shortcomings of Obama as a President, but this was still something important, especially in the light of what followed, as the author says.
________________________________________________________________________________


To delve deeper into the sexual power and subversive sartorial expressions of the witch, I spoke with author, fashion historian, and Director of the Museum at FIT Valerie Steele.

“We know historically that most of the women who were executed as witches were older women who were vilified and scapegoated,” says Steele. “I do think that in the sexy fashion images you compare the younger, Lolita-like princess with the older maleficent witch who is sexually mature and a phallic figure.”

This “phallic woman,” she explains, embodies the popular male fantasy of the powerful, sexually dominant woman. Steele references the dominatrixes she interviewed for her book Fetish: Fashion, Sex & Power. “They talked about how high heels and corsets and high hair and anything that makes you a hard, tall, and dominant-looking figure reinforces the power differential, but also emphasizes the power of erotic femininity.”

But although the witch-as-phallic-woman is erotically charged, this doesn’t translate to scantily clad. “We tend to think nowadays that sexuality is expressed in body exposure,” Steele points out. “However, people who have thought about sex ranging from Casanova to Freud have talked a lot about the attraction of concealment. So the idea of having the body all covered often takes its cue from a neo-Victorian aesthetic.” And within that aesthetic, black is a mercurial shade, used to signify everything from sexy evil to mourning. “Black has such a powerful range of meanings,” Steele affirms. (pg 108)



Interesting and you don't hear enough about the ageism angle in the Witch Trials.
________________________________________________________________________________


The author notes pop culture witches, for better and for worse:

When the feminist movement first gained visibility in the early 1960s, the witch began to transcend her evil origins. Whether this was a coincidence, a reflection of women’s liberation, or an attempt to declaw the witch and offer a kinder, gentler sorceress is difficult to say. Nevertheless, the first major pop culture witch in this category (post-Glinda, of course) is Samantha Stephens from Bewitched.

Samantha made her bouncy blonde debut one year after the 1963 publication of Betty Friedan’s The Feminine Mystique, which galvanized the women’s liberation movement by uncovering “the problem that has no name”—the plight of white, middle-class housewives under the crushing thumb of patriarchy. Five episodes of Bewitched were written by self-described feminist Barbara Avedon, and despite its bourgeois trappings, the show did present an alternate take on gender roles that was forward-thinking for its time.

In the first episode of the show, Samantha confesses her powers to new husband Darrin, only to be told never to use them again— because they scare the hell out of him. She reluctantly agrees, but soon after, while staring with frustration at a messy kitchen, she wiggles her nose and poof! Domestic duties done.

Samantha uses witchcraft throughout the series to manage both personal and professional issues, much to the chagrin of her husband, who often wishes she would behave like a “normal” woman. Magic thus functions in Bewitched as an apt metaphor for feminism— knowledge with the potential for personal empowerment and transformation that is feared and forbidden by the patriarchs. (pgs 112 and 113)



BeWitched as a sitcom actually has a lot going for it with both its feminist and Queer coding. That and it's just delightful.


Nearly a decade later, The Craft was released to great success, garnering
induction into the canon of teen witch feminism. A closer look, however, reveals an unsavory underbelly. The 1996 film depicts four young women discovering friendship and magic and banding together to fight their foes— before it all goes terribly, terribly wrong. What begins as a promising show of female bonding descends into a sexist circle jerk around the idea that girls just can’t handle power.

As practicing witch and feminist writer Morgan Claire Sirene sums it up in her critique of The Craft for Slutist: “This film is a feminist nightmare masquerading as a cool subculture flick. When I say feminist nightmare, I mean the original feminists: Witches. This film isn’t a celebration, it’s a witch burning.”

One of the most problematic characters is Nancy, the quintessential goth bad girl who suffers from a traumatic home life and has dealt with vicious slut-shaming at school. Eventually, she turns on her friends and becomes homicidal, killing the young jock who once spread rumors about her. Instead of being portrayed as wounded by toxic teen culture and lashing out in self-defense, Nancy is positioned as a villainous psychopath. Despite her abusive background, we are not meant to sympathize with this young woman. She ends up institutionalized at the film’s end, and the good girl/bad girl binary marches on.

“It’s just like every other misogynist work showcasing women as basket cases who can’t handle power, sex or even friendship. They must be locked up or lead a more pious life,” Sirene concludes. (pgs 113 and 114)



I'm going to say it: this is a lazy, lousy, reductive take. The Craft has its flaws and has been tricky with the Witch (note capital W) community since it debuted. The fact real Witches (including one of its stars, Fairuza Balk) consulted to make the imaginary witchcraft in the film look a lot like the real thing brought overeager fans in droves to Witch and Pagan communities that rolled their eyes at being repeatedly asked questions based on the idea that what people had seen in the film was the real thing. Little mention was made of the fact the film was kept explicitly imaginary by the Witches consulting ("Manoc" is not a real thing, he's invented for the film). This influx of annoying newbies in Witch communities there for The Craft wasn't just at the release, it was still going on for at least a decade after. So I understand the irritation a lot of Witches feel for this movie.

I think if you realize that it's imaginary and not mean to be a depiction of actual Witchcraft (and that's a point made explicitly), it's not too much different from any other fictional witch film. I bristle at the characterization of Nancy by the author and the reviewer: yes, she's absolutely a victim of both sexshaming and a traumatic home life. But a critical part of the film is that she grows mad with power, unlike the protagonist, Sarah, who has also suffered (she never knew her mother who died giving birth to her and her previous suicide attempt is seen in flashback; some fan theories speculate that the family moved because the suicide attempt was part of a larger tragic backstory that was cut from the film) but maintains a more level-headed approach to her power, which is shown to be just as great if not greater than Nancy's.

Also the whole "just like every other misogynist work showcasing women as basket cases who can’t handle power, sex or even friendship" overlooks a huge character in the film and a pivotal ally for Sarah, the owner of the occult shop, Lirio, who's shown to have considerable power of her own, which she wields judiciously.

The "sexist circle jerk around the idea that girls just can’t handle power" handily overlooks the fact that Sarah must face her fears and draw on her inner strength to wield her own power and face down Nancy's attack. Basically, it's both a coming of age story and a story about two girls and the very different ways they handle their great power. I'm not saying there isn't plenty to be criticized with the film (the racial aspects for one, both on and off the screen, according to one of the film's stars, Rachel True) but I am saying it's considerably more complex than the author (and reviewer Morgan Claire Sirene) deride about it.
________________________________________________________________________________


An interesting comparison to draw between the fears of what Witchcraft was and the reality of feminism:

Witches gathering deep in the woods conjuring mayhem inspired far more fear than solitary witches on the prowl. The “collective aspects” of witchcraft drove witch hysteria, according to John Demos in The Enemy Within— things like “shared rites, nocturnal meetings (the so-called sabbat) to renounce God and Christ, particular strategies of witch-to-witch recruitment, [and] the making of an explicit ‘pact’ with Satan.”

Similar to the unholy witch covens imagined by men in early modern Europe, feminist consciousness-raising (CR) groups in the 1960s featured the most frightening thing of all—women united outside the company of men. What they did, what they said, and what they planned was a mystery to all but those involved.

These private, informal meet-ups where women were encouraged to open up about their struggles and desires helped crystallize the contemporary feminist movement. There, The Feminine Mystique and the feminine mystic began to coalesce.

Early CR groups usually took place in someone’s residence, where “women gained the strength to challenge patriarchal forces at work and at home,” bell hooks writes in Feminism Is for Everybody. Such a setting was
ideal for intimate discussions about everything from workplace harassment and child rearing to the female orgasm. Whatever the women in each group chose to focus on, the meetings often took a nonhierarchical format in which longtime feminist thinkers and activists could share ideas with curious newcomers.

When the Goddess movement* began to gain popularity within feminist circles in the late 1960s, the witch and feminist worlds began to collide.

“The great lesson of CR was that personal feelings were to be trusted and acted upon, and that the personal was political,” explains Wiccan priestess Margot Adler in Drawing Down the Moon. “The step from CR group to the coven was not long. Both are small groups that meet regularly and are involved in deeply personal questions. Only the focus differs.”

Starhawk also uses the language of feminism to describe a coven in The Spiral Dance. “The coven is a Witch’s support group, consciousness-raising group, psychic study center,” she writes, and its small size “makes it possible for rabid individualists to experience a deep sense of community without losing their independence of spirit.”

As in a consciousness-raising group, much of what occurs between members in a coven is private, and only for the eyes and ears of those present. In fact, some covens never publicly share their existence to anyone outside their membership. Although the workings of such covens are better detailed in grimoires and spiritual guides, there is a new kind of coven on the rise.

These feminist groups may or may not follow a codified spiritual path, but still tap into the ancient practice of women gathering to create community and create change.
________________________________________


* The Goddess movement developed in the late 1960s as a response to male-dominated religions. The neo-pagan practice has no central tenets or universal rites, but includes the worship and reclaiming of the divine feminine. Many of its followers also look with reverence to the ultimate persecuted woman in Christian history— the witch

(pgs 119 and 120)


________________________________________________________________________________


Non-profit activist organization Lady Parts Justice League may not seem explicitly witchy, but defines itself as “a coven of hilarious badass feminists who use humor and pop culture to expose the haters fighting against reproductive rights.” When asked how the group’s aims connect with witchcraft, comedian, co-creator of The Daily Show, and founder of LPJL Lizz Winstead told Slutist: “Witches brew up good things and dispel evil. (pg 121)



I like Lizz Winstead and one of my all-time favorite shows wouldn't exist without her, but I hate the term "lady parts" to mean uteri. Without meaning to be, it's transphobic, but it's also just asinine.
________________________________________________________________________________


The author interviews various people throughout the book. This is an organization "with the structure of a coven" that meets once a month to "cook, share, create, and experiment under a full moon" and they also give classes about crafting to make things like balms, candles, and woven wall hangings. They're called "Ravenous Craft" and they aim to "reconnect with your wild nature" by working harmoniously with the natural world.

What was your first meeting like?

Mallory: The impetus for the first Ravenous dinner was that I knew all these rad women one on one. Growing up, I was always more of a lone wolf (rather, Erin and I were like sister lone wolves), so I figured, let me try
joining together some of my favorite babes to see what the fuck happens. And that first night was magical. We made beeswax candles...

Marielle: There were explosions, knife wielding [laughs]...

Mallory: We all got real and crude and vulgar and listened to metal. No conversation topic was off the table. This was long before the witch trend, but Rosemary kept making fun of me because at the time my kitchen had so many dried herbs and jars all over the place, and a cauldron, and she was saying, “I keep feeling like you’re gonna take some children and boil them.” And we were like, “Yeah! We’re like a coven.” (pg 122)




I'm guessing by "witch trend" they're referring to the late 2010s thing, but the witch trend has been going on for far longer than that.


And you’re defying that whole narrative of other women as competition.

Mallory: Because that’s a constructed narrative!

Marielle: Yeah, we also admire and acknowledge each other’s differences and flaws. A lot of people, especially in girl groups, acknowledge people’s flaws— but as a fault. We just see them as a different way of looking at things. There’s no jealousy or expectations. We have a very good understanding of the differences among the group and can be better people because we can help each other. It’s a positive thing to be able to see things
differently. (pgs 123 and 124)



"A lot of people, especially in girl groups, acknowledge people’s flaws— but as a fault." I get that this is probably an offhand remark, but this is the kind of internalized misogyny of which you have to be aware. You honestly think in multi-gender groups or all male groups there's lesser acknowledgement of flaws? Really?
________________________________________________________________________________


Perusing the [witch-related merchandise at an Urban Outfitters], I found it ironic that witch merch is so in vogue, given that the archetypal witch can be viewed as an early modern threat to mercantilism. As Marxist feminist scholar Silvia Federici argues, the witch is “the embodiment of a world of female subjects that capitalism had to destroy” in order for the reigning economic order to triumph. And yet, because mainstream economic, religious, medicinal, cultural, and political structures arguably don’t offer much in the way of affordable and effective self-care, the trend of witchy herbs and potions being sold at corporate retailers can also be viewed as an answer to the primal need to re-connect with our wild natures and heal ourselves. (pg 132)



An interesting point.
________________________________________________________________________________


In 2016, famed pandrogynous musician and occultist Genesis Breyer P-Orridge told Dazed magazine that the trend of “gender free” fashion is profiting off the trans community, which faces extreme levels of violence and state-sanctioned persecution.

“What’s been co-opted is the politics of identity,” s/he said, “and it has been trivialized into one season’s fashion and that’s a dangerous way of reducing the importance of the real issues. And that’s something that the
corporate world does very well. They always co-opt and even coerce new radical ideas that express the underground, the street culture, and they do it very deliberately because they realized a very long time ago that if they
reduce it and co-opt it, it loses its power to change anything.” (pg 133)



I was going to make a mention about the "s/he" but P-Orridge used s/he, as well as they and she.
________________________________________________________________________________


Where democratic dissemination ends and exploitation begins is tricky territory.

The same issues are at play within contemporary feminism. When is marketing feminist products a gateway to radical, life-changing ideas, and when is it merely watering down and co-opting a movement for corporate gain? Bitch Media co-founder Andi Zeisler’s We Were Feminists Once:From Riot Grrrl to CoverGirl, the Buying and Selling of a Political Movement unpacks this complex issue.

Zeisler first looks into the ways feminism has driven corporate commerce, opening her book with a ludicrous advertisement using the Seneca Falls Convention to sell women Platinum MasterCards. Women have always been a target consumer demographic, she explains, even before “the f-word” rose to prominence. In years past, companies chased after women to buy Maidenform bras and Virginia Slims cigarettes using language that embodied feminine freedom, and now it’s Dove Body Wash. The common denominator? Selling liberation through lifestyle goods.

Zeisler writes: “The narrative that feminism has succeeded because it’s all over the internet, because it’s a marketing buzz-word, because there’s a handful of famous people happy to serve as its icons is as wrongheaded as
the notion that feminism succeeded when (white) women got the vote or when the first female CEO stepped a sensible shoe into her spacious office.”

This misguided perspective is what some have called “Lean In Feminism,” named after Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg’s book about corporate women breaking the glass ceiling: Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead.

In a 2013 piece for The Feminist Wire, bell hooks takes Sandberg’s feminist philosophy to task. “Sandberg’s definition of feminism begins and ends with the notion that it’s all about gender equality within the existing
social system,” hooks writes. “From this perspective, the structures of imperialist white supremacist capitalist patriarchy need not be challenged. And she makes it seem that privileged white men will eagerly choose to extend the benefits of corporate capitalism to white women who have the courage to ‘lean in.’” (pgs 134 and 135)



An excellent breakdown of "Lean In Feminism".
________________________________________________________________________________


Drawn together by the labyrinthine networks that link the like-minded, “generation witch” is a product of contemporary technology. Creating community has become ritualized in new ways: the selfie, the hashtag, the snap, the swipe. As the wireless world blurs IRL and URL, and with it our so-called “real selves” and online personas, we have the opportunity to connect with more people than ever before. (pg 137)



Apparently not blurred enough for the author to see that the internet IS a part of real life. These things are a part of us and our very real lives. The people you talk to online are real people. It's losing sight of this fact (or deliberately ignoring it) that's allowed for a rise of abuse in online spaces.


During the early days of the internet, some predicted the digital sphere would become a utopia where equality flourished, and identity categories dissolved. Maria Fernandez writes in Domain Errors!: Cyberfeminist Practice, “Electronic media theorists and commercial entities alike maintain that ‘differences’ of gender, race and class are nonexistent in the internet due to the disembodied nature of electronic communication.”

At the time, there were also cyberfeminists who saw the flaws in this perspective. Beth Kolko et al. offer a contrasting viewpoint in Race in Cyberspace. “Cyberspace has been construed as something that exists in
binary opposition to ‘the real world,’” they write, “but when it comes to questions of power, politics and structural relations, cyberspace is as real as it gets.”(pg 137 and 138)



I genuinely laughed at the first paragraph. Such sweet summer children.
________________________________________________________________________________


The author visits Salem and takes in the tourism.

After joining together in a nondenominational pagan ritual where the group invoked the power of nature or the deity of our choosing for protection, we headed toward the cemetery. Next to the grassy, shaded burial ground marked with the aging graves of Salem notables is the Salem Witch Trials Memorial. A protruding stone slab is dedicated to each victim, listing their names and how they died. As you enter the area, you’re likely to step across a thin strip of stone chiseled with the incomplete last words of convicted “witches.” It’s so subtle you could easily miss it. The guide points out how the pleas of these innocent dead would be forever trampled by oblivious visitors walking through. The symbolism is undeniable.

As we traversed the monument and the cemetery, our witch guide discussed contemporary witchcraft practices and the persecution of witches over the centuries. She spoke about the archetypal goddess triad— maiden, mother, and crone—and how contemporary feminist and witchcraft scholars are reframing these stages for a more expansive and inclusive take on womanhood. All the while she hammered home again and again how uninformed our cultural image of the witch is.

Witches are not servants of the Devil, she said, and in fact, witches can follow any religion and still practice witchcraft. Witches do not all dress in flowing robes (although, natch, it’s fun to do). Witches do not eat babies—
but they do drink Dunkin Donuts coffee. Witches, too, run on Dunkin, she joked.

Witches! They’re just like us.

With such an accessible, down-to-earth explanation of witchcraft and witch history, one can only assume those who entered the tour filled with pejorative propaganda about witches would abandon much of it by the end.

And I hope you’ll leave this primer in similar fashion. (pgs 144 and 145)



Spotty and not-entirely accurate information (WITCHCRAFT CAN AND IS A RELIGION UNTO ITSELF TO SOME, THANK YOU) that puts style over substance and in a sometimes cloying way is actually exactly how I'd leave this book, so well done.
________________________________________________________________________________


Outside the Western bubble, however, women are currently accused of witchcraft in shocking numbers.

Women deemed witches for decades have been banished to “witch camps” in Ghana, where a belief in witchcraft persists amongst the population. Two thousand people accused of witchcraft have been murdered in Northeast India over the last fifteen years— the majority women— and an estimated six hundred elderly women were killed in 2011 because they were suspected of practicing witchcraft in Tanzania.

In 2015, a graphic video uploaded by citizens in Papua New Guinea showed four women accused of witchcraft stripped naked and burned alive. According to some tribal beliefs, the womb houses evil spirits, and women are most often thought to be witches after unexplained deaths or monetary and property conflicts arise in their communities. Estimates by the United Nations list the numbers of witch executions at around two hundred a year, and until 2013, murdering a witch in self-defense was enshrined in the country’s constitution.

Witch hunting in the very literal sense occurs with alarming frequency, but there are those who fight back to help persecuted women in need. Amnesty International created the Women Not Witches outreach program, and local activists on the frontlines have formed grassroots groups to tackle witch hunts and misogyny in their individual countries.

For the past fifteen years, Birubala Rabha has been one of these crusaders in the northern Indian state of Assam. In a place where women are still brutalized for being suspected witches, she campaigns tirelessly to educate local communities and governments about the error in their beliefs. According to an article in BBC News, her efforts have saved dozens of women’s lives, and even helped inspire a 2015 anti-witch-hunting law.

“They will always find new reasons to brand women as witches,” Rabha said to a gathering of women in Assam. “But don’t be scared, challenge the offenders and report them to the police. This battle is not going to end
anytime soon.” (pg 146 and 147)



I'm glad this aspect is covered, that this level of femicide and this angle of it isn't going unmentioned.
________________________________________________________________________________


The author asks a bunch of people some questions about witches and witchcraft and the answers are interesting, as are the people themselves.

Part of living a magical life for me means I integrate my practice and ideals as a witch into every aspect of my life. I don’t go to work and then come home and put on my witch hat. It’s always there to varying degrees depending on circumstance. The resurgence of Goddess practices like the Goddess Movement and the Red Tent Movement are very much a rejection of the suppression of feminine energy, and so I personally see them as being political movements as well as spiritual. I also believe that the rejection of the gender binary is in many ways a product of the idea that feminine and masculine energy are present in all beings regardless of their physical biology. Goddess energy is available to everyone, and the feminine is rising.
—Vanessa Irena (pg 160)



Nice to see it kept inclusive, as it should be.


Witchcraft and feminism entered my life around the same time— when I was nine. My friends and I were heavily obsessed with Sailor Moon and the Spice Girls, so when we learned about Wicca (saw The Craft) the admission was seamless. Witchcraft has always been about the power of love and friendship to me, and my feminism started that way too— by bonding with women. Now I see both more as a power of the self and body, but it was through my coven that I learned this. —Morgan Claire Sirene (pgs 160 and 161)



I chuckled a bit at the inclusion clearly of what that movie meant to this person when the author was so dismissive about it pages before.


I don’t separate my witchcraft from my feminism— they’re very much similar mechanics of my belief systems. For me, witchcraft and feminism share the same goal: self-sovereignty. I think this is why witchcraft has historically belonged to women and queer folx rather than men— it is intrinsically a means of rebellion against oppression and reclaiming stolen power. —Melissa Madara (pg 161)



I wonder if that's the same Melissa Madara of The Witch's Feast who also co-owns Catland Books?


What are some of your favorite spells or remedies for opening the sacral chakra or fostering sexual energy? (pg 161)



I've talked before about Chakras being possibly appropriative (obviously, religions with millions and millions of people aren't going to have one single answer to most questions like that) if you are not Hindu or Buddhist. It's easy enough to use another term for the energy centers of the body, and in this question, it's definitely not necessary.


How has your witch identity or witchcraft practice impacted your life for the better?

Being a witch has always given me a fierce sense of individuality and self-confidence. Especially once I found The Satanic Bible. I feel like it opened my eyes to there being a lot of different ways to think in the world, and in trying times when I would have to cope with prejudice. After that, I really just felt bad for the close-minded [sic] plebeians who couldn’t wrap their head around the idea of whatever they didn’t like about me. Also let’s be real, when daily bullshit pops up you know you can always conjure a little fix for it, so the problem doesn’t seem to be as much of a problem. —Severely Mame (pg 163)



I've said my piece about Witchcraft and including Satan into it, so I'll just note that I laughed at "After that, I really just felt bad for the close-minded plebeians who couldn’t wrap their head around the idea of whatever they didn’t like about me." Inspirational, kinda?



Final Grade: C-

No comments:

Post a Comment

Book-It '23! Book #26: "All About Me! My Remarkable Life in Show Business" by Mel Brooks

  THANKS FOR UNDERSTANDING SOME SEASONAL EXTENSIONS ! ALSO PLEASE REMEMBER I HAVE A FAQ POST NOW! LOVE AND THANKS TO ALL MY READERS! The al...