Food Part 6: The witch-craze in India today

During this series on food I have been outlining the ways that men took women on, when they usurped control of food. The Western European witch-craze was a water shed. Women had (in men’s eyes) become too powerful and they wanted to redress the balance. Create a “balanced” world where women have nothing.

Today Western women own land, sure, but a rule of patriarchy is to allow women to have things (votes, land) when they’re no longer worth anything. Because women aren’t productive with their land and have lost their knowledge of what works well, they’re still forced to rely on the food supply chain system, and therefore are in no way a threat to the status quo.

But there is another aspect to the witch-craze. Another piece of the puzzle that we need to look at. And that is, the midwives. 

How can I put this? The midwives were badass. They were patriarchy’s worst nightmare, and still are in countries around the world.

Take a moment to let that sink in. Why would patriarchy fear and despise midwives? My readers will have to work with me here.

Think.

Alongside the women who had land, why would the midwives be the group most targeted?

(For reference, the word “midwife” simply means “with woman”, from the German language. The word “wife” is misleading in English– it suggests a relationship with men. But it actually just means “woman”. She is the woman who is with women while they’re in labour. Germany lost more women than any other country during the witch-craze. It was a killing frenzy over there)

Let’s get out of the way the issue of female autonomy in childbirth. When male Ob/Gyns opened the first birth “houses” in Germany, women would commit suicide rather than be forced by their husbands to enter them. The women weren’t wrong to do so. Survival rates inside these hospitals were abysmal. They suffered tortuous deaths, to be sure. No doubt their dying screams could be heard across the towns. Today, giving birth alone, or at home with a midwife is statistically safer than giving birth in hospital. The astronomically high maternal death rate in the U.S.can be correlated positively with the medicalization of birth. The death rate for women having C-sections is particularly high. When the U.S ranks 42nd in the world, for its survival rate for mothers, there’s no such thing as American women privilege in childbirth. (By the way, I would encourage women to educate each other on the stats about medicalization of childbirth and how this causes deaths. For Americans, Ina May Gaskin’s work is a good reference. The death rate is so high that I see this as a far more pressing and urgent issue than trans. Having watched  the trans agenda unfold over the years, I see that western women are stuck in post industrial, post-modernist hell.  The measure of it all is that women with spare energy are devoting their activism to fighting trans, when they live in a country that has got more women dying in childbirth than almost anywhere else in the world.) (You can also educate women and girls about PIV and celibacy, or lesbianism, of course). American women are the canaries in the coal mine . The ones to let us know which moves global patriarchy is making next.

So why did men suddenly want to get involved in childbirth?  Were they simply jealous that women could do something they couldn’t, and hated the fact they were always  on the periphery of reproduction? Was it some porny birth fetish that made them want to watch women in pain? All of these, yes.

But the deep truth is that midwives had power over life and death. That’s how patriarchal powers (correctly) assessed the situation. In certain places around the world, like Papua New Guinea, midwives still retain this ancient female power today.

Silvia Federici writes:

” women began to be prosecuted in large numbers, and more were executed for infanticide in 16th and 17th- century Europe than for any other crime except for witchcraft, a charge that also centred on the killing of children and other violations of reproductive norms (abortion).

“While in the Middle Ages women had been able to use various forms of contraceptives, and had exercised undisputed control over the birthing process, from now on their wombs became public territory, controlled by men and state…

Also the sexual sadism displayed by the torturers to which the accused were subjected reveals a misogyny that has no parallel in history……The execution was an important public event, which all the members of the community had to attend, including all the children of the witches, especially their daughters who, in some cases, would be whipped in front of the stake on which they could see their mother burning alive.

The witch hunt, then, was a war against women; it was a concerted attempt to degrade them, demonize them, and destroy their social power. At the same time, it was in the torture chambers and on the stakes on which the witches perished that the bourgeois ideals of womanhood and domesticity were forged.

In a patriarchal twist, the remaining midwives were turned into handmaidens, who had to report all new births.

With the marginalization of the midwife, the process began by which women lost the control they had exercised over procreation, and were reduced to a passive role in child delivery, while male doctors came to be seen as the true “givers of life”

So this was our last stand. And it was European men’s final stab at conquering women for good. We lost our best women, in battle, no less. But nobody observing us should ever say  that we women of the West didn’t try. Tried, and failed. Today we no longer have knowledge of land, food and no longer any power over life and death.

The final humiliation is that nowadays the word “witch”  evokes nothing more suspicious than a frivolous woman lighting candles and burning sage in her kitchen.

But she still survives in the madwoman– the woman so struck by the horror that she retreats into her own world, or else she is simply put away because she’s unfeminine, shrill, strident, refuses to care for her babies and husband. The madwoman is the shadowy remains of the witch. Men lock her up because they do fear her. She is dangerous because she’s proof that not all women can be controlled and domesticated , and because she’s unpredictable. But most of all, because she might pose a danger to men, if she lashes out.

But enough about Western women, for now.

***

In many countries around the world, however, the “witch” still evokes fear, sexuality, dread, danger and power.

Let’s take a look at what is happening to women who are being accused as witches in India today, to give us an idea of what our ancestors went through, and to remind us that the reason the witch-craze is still ongoing around the world is because in many places women haven’t been broken and retain power and knowledge.

In my last post I looked at Basi behen  in India. In her case, the accusation of being a witch was a clear-cut example of her brother-in-law wanting to steal her land. Feminist groups in India are onto this and as we see in Basi behen’s case, female lawyers are able to effectively legislate on behalf of the women.

I don’t know what percentage of the European witch craze was about land, but because land and power go hand in hand, you can be sure every witch who was accused held and managed some land, even if it was a smallholding or a garden. Midwives would have been offered gifts from the grateful mothers they helped, would have been able to amass  resources.  I stand by the assertion that the witch-craze in Europe was a “land-grab.”

Suttee has been outlawed and is illegal in India today, but the practice of widow-burning still exists. When a woman’s husband dies, she is sometimes burned on the funeral pyre with him. Mary Daly looked at this atrocity in detail. But a little known fact is how it came about. In an interview with a Sikh in London years ago, I heard suttee being defended on the grounds that “women tend to kill their husbands, so we have to put methods in place to prevent them from doing so. If women know they will be burned if their husbands die, they will desist”. When I first heard of this justification, I was of course appalled. But now I’ve researched the ways that women have resisted patriarchy, I wonder, are Indian men being paranoid when they assume women will kill their husbands? Or are they not…?

Indian women are feared for the likelihood they might kill their husbands, while western women are sucking their husbands’ cocks. And I don’t mean that facetiously. I’m saying: look at what they’ve done to us, and look how far we’ve fallen. While Indian men are worried their wives might kill them, European men are worried about how best to convince their wives to enthusiastically agree to anal sex.

Of course in many articles, you will see suttee being regarded as a woman’s way to express her devotion to her husband. This overlooks the fact that a widow would be treated badly by society, and I believe most women figured they’d rather burn alive than live out the rest of their days in humiliation.

But again suttee can also be traced back to land. Although women of all castes were affected:

historically, the practice of sati was to be found among many castes and at every social level, chosen by or for both uneducated and the highest ranking women of the times.  The common deciding factor was often ownership of wealth or property, since all possessions of the widow devolved to the husband’s family upon her death.

Islamic moguls tried to ban the practice of Suttee on the grounds that it was barbaric. But it persists today. In May 2006, Vidyawati, a 35-year-old woman allegedly jumped into the funeral pyre of her husband in Rari-Bujurg Village, Uttar Pradesh. In August 2006, Janakrani, a 40-year-old woman, died on the funeral pyre of her husband in Sagar district. In October 2008, a 75-year-old woman committed sati by jumping into her 80-year-old husband’s funeral pyre at Checher in Raipur.

Let’s be clear, I’m not justifying suttee– for people who have a habit of accidentally on purpose misunderstanding me. I’m saying: these women still have life in them yet. Not zombies. Not hollowed-out shells. Those of us here who dread the nursing homes that await us in the Western world are right to. They’re terrifying. Are we freer because we live out our days in rooms smelling of piss, with dementia confused men, locked inside, with tasteless food and rapey staff, with a weekly board game night to look forward to, drugged so we don’t complain, a monthly visit from the adult children who put us in there? Which of us would jump on the fire rather than face this fate? No western woman today, that I know.

There is plenty of information on the witch-craze in India.

Many of the accusations have roots in property disputes, local politics, and disease, which then develop into allegations of witchcraft and then to violence. In recent years, there has been a concentrated effort to help women who fled their villages because of persecution. But according to Al Jazeera, there are only three Indian states that have legislation to address accusations of witchcraft.

The similarities with the European and American witch-craze are astounding:

In India, a person accused of being a “dayan” or witch can be tortured, raped, hacked to death, or burned alive. Victims are often single older women, usually widows,

But I think European men had the edge over Indian men. Systematically whipping the witches’ daughters, as they were forced to watch their mother burn, is quite something.

What I’m trying to say is this. It has already happened to us in the West. It has happened, and it changed us, and there’s no going back, as far as I can see. It doesn’t happen anymore because there’s nothing left of us. Western women are the descendants of the women who have already been conquered. All men need to do now is tweak things a little. Domestic violence and rape here and there, a couple of women murdered every week in the UK by their husbands. No great fanfare. No sensational burnings at the stake. No dramatic martyrdom and parading of women naked through villages anymore. No women throwing themselves on funeral pyres to escape poverty. No. In the U.K, our oppression consists of the quietly ignored, effortless ongoing murder of already docile wives (two women murdered a week, in fact), the killing of women in childbirth (of women who are so lost and removed from knowledge of their own bodies that they are convinced of the fact that men are helping them, even as they lay dying on the hospital bed) and the drugging of the leftover madwomen. Nowhere to grow food, nowhere to harbour friends or women wanting somewhere to stay. We have nothing.

Advertisements

12 thoughts on “Food Part 6: The witch-craze in India today

  1. Finally we enter the root of all the ongoing misogyny. We didn’t come that far yet, did we? And, women still prefer to look away or blame their own gender, or follow the beauty terror and beauty operations to impress the menz. Not much hope yet….
    But this series is just fantastic, thank you

  2. Thinking about suttee. Perhaps, when a woman dies in childbirth, her husband should be killed as a display of honour towards her. Nothing changes for the better unless it affects men negatively. We have seen this through time.

    • I’ve been thinking about your comment since this morning, storyend. I think what you’re suggesting would be getting close to something like justice. I think that under normal circumstances, paternity wouldn’t be known by men. I read somewhere they only learned about it after they observed animals which they had begun to farm. I’m not sure whether that’s true or not. But I suspect it’s closer to normal for men not to know whose baby the woman has birthed. Men are best kept in the dark about these things, in my opinion.

      But since men are obsessed with paternity, to the extent that they basically want to own us, so they can be sure their vessel has definitely carried their seed, then yes, absolutely, under these circumstances, when a woman dies in childbirth, the man should show respect by killing himself too. And if these are the rules, fewer men would be willing to become fathers. Only those who REALLy want to pass on their Y, for reasons known only to them, would do it. Thinking about men, and what they are, the thought of death probably wouldn’t put them off wanting to have their very own Y carrier. But them killing themselves if “their” woman dies in childbirth, is a good start.

      • Hehe, my comment was sort of tongue in cheek. I don’t actually have a solution for heterosexuals who want heterosexuality to continue. I think it is an impossible situation that absolutely can’t exist without female slavery. So my ‘solution’ is more just for my own amusement and enjoyment in the sheer contemplation of forced suicide following one’s slave dying in childbirth 😉

        Ideally, I want all men gone forever, and breeding becomes a completely different thing altogether. No value or judgment attached to doing it or not doing it. No shame and alienation and invisibility and dying alone and in poverty for those women who don’t live up to the ‘female purpose’ by choosing not to breed. No accidental pregnancies, lost dreams, forced choices, job juggling, etc for those who do. In fact, women wouldn’t be defined by their breeding capabilities if men didn’t exist. As long as they are around, they dictate our purpose, and they have deemed us objects meant for serving their needs and breeding. Without them, an entirely different societal structure would exist. All pregnancies would be planned and wanted and carried out by those who truly want to experience it. And jeez, we wouldn’t have to devote so much of our physical, emotional and mental energies to dealing with all of this. There would be so much more for women. So many possibilities, and no ‘issues’ associated with breeding, not breeding, terminating life, etc. That would be real freedom.

    • My words since 7000 years……. All our suffering and appealing to male intelligence, fairness, understanding and even empathy didn’t change
      anything. All that has changed is that women now parrot men and are also getting more and more misogynistic. That cannot be the solution, can it? Maybe we have to dig up old and forgotten female warrior tactics.

      • Indeed yvonne52. And if western women are the conquered women, then we must look to women elsewhere in the world for tactics, ideas and solutions. We have to find out what other women are up to, learn and collaborate. We’re most likely going to have to beg for help, at some point.

    • Well quite. I think it’s a given , that post patriarchy, women would only ever reproduce for their own personal reasons.
      In the first scenario I imagined a world where women do only reproduce for their own motives : curiosity or whatever . Not for any other reason than that , when imagining other worlds . When I said men don’t need to know who the father is, i didnt mean that the pregancy might be accidental. Of course not !

      I’m suspicious of sperm banking. I would want to know that the man smelled and looked ok in the flesh. Are we genetically compatible? Does he look diseased? And because I hate anything vaguely medical and would wonder if the sperm can be damaged while it’s being messed with . IVF causes an increase in pregnancy complications . So we’d be looking at a turkey Baster job , in the world of my creation . Storing sperm gives me the eew factor like nothing else and I wouldnt risk a pregancy with anything that had been defrosted, or kept in storage. The chance of birth defects must increase, surely?

      As for men, yes, I would keep a few around, if we ever have a successful revolution. Trust your perceptions pointed out that over the course of evolution maleness came on the scene to help women evolve.

      If women decide not to reproduce for risk of recreating patriarchy , well that’s a legitimate point of view too, of course .

  3. Disabled activists have been against nursing homes and other forms of institutionalization for a long time because it isolates and segregates disabled people from society. I know this because I am a disabled woman and interested in the disability movement, particularly how these issues effect women and the opposition to assisted suicide in the movement.

    • Yes, as with any movement, it’s only relevant to women if a radical feminist analysis is applied. Women think of suicide to escape patriarchy usually, not so much to escape their bodies or their old age or their mental health. They want to escape the humiliating treatment they receive for living under patriarchy with these extra problems on top of being a woman. In Belgium young women with mental health issues are now opting for assisted suicide. We don’t know if they have been sexually abused or have been through some other similar trauma, because often mental health practitioners believe mental health problems are a chemical imbalance in the brain that should be treated with drugs. “Why isn’t she happy?” they pretend to wonder, and wring their hands in fake perplexity. When really the real problem is that the woman lives in a patriarchy from which there is no escape.

      Women are more likely to look after each other than men, in my opinion, given the right circumstances and resources. The evil of patriarchy is that we lose our girlhood friends, the ones who would have cared for us, and who we would have cared for.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s