we have brains

Warrior Womyn

November 23, 2003 05:43 PM posted by alison : track it (1)

This week is Warrior Womyn week on the Discovery Channel. With Xena... ahem... Lucy Lawless hosting, they are profiling the lives of five warrior womyn. Those profiled include Mulan, Joan of Arc, Lozen, Grace O'Malley and Boudica. For the final two nights, they are showing specials on Women Pharohs and the Queen of Sheba. The outline is here.

Is this television special one you will watch? How do you feel about such a focus on Warrior Womyn? Do you feel that we should have this specific and individual focus, or should they be included in general historical views of warriors? Should we focus on the past, or should we be educating on our modern warriors? And, lastly, who would you include if you were making the schedule?

« grrrly news 11/23 | whb homepage | feministifying the holidays »

your comments : post a new comment

First one to post! My response is up here. Someone who has the time to watch TV should review the special on the msg board...

Posted by: megan on November 23, 2003 10:23 PM |

My response is posted here: http://the-goddess.org/blog/index.html

Basically, I think we have to reclaim our past if we are going to have a future. I'd have Cleopatra on that list, if it were up to me.

Posted by: Morgaine Swann on November 24, 2003 02:36 AM |

Part one of my response is here. I promise that the second part won't be as cranky when I actually answer the rest of the question.

Posted by: Kerri on November 24, 2003 11:50 PM |

The 2nd part of my response is on my blog.

Posted by: kerri on November 26, 2003 04:32 PM |

Snaps to Kerri for the "these women can kick butt and not break a nail" summary of the Discovery Channel advert. Sad, but true.

My own post on the subject is up on my blog.

Posted by: april on November 29, 2003 09:22 PM |

I concur with Kerri's statement. But it makes me wonder about femininity and power. One problem for a lot of women in power is that they are expected to become masculinized. And even other feminists tend to stigmatize being girly. So yes, there is a condescending aspect of those descriptions that Kerri caught in a nutshell. But is there something wrong with a woman who is powerful and girly? Shouldn't women be able to choose all aspects of their lifestyle?
A quick caveat on this - I don't think not wanting to break a nail is a girly trait, it's a trait that is completely tied up in girly-weakness. That phrase just reminded me of this other issue - like I said, I completely agree with Kerri's comment.

Posted by: megan on November 29, 2003 11:03 PM |

I only have a couple of things to say on this. Hence no post...

1) I wont watch it, but I wouldn't be watching a show about Warrior Men either.

2) Why does the definition of warrior women need to involve death? Why cant we celebrate "warriors" for peace and justice like: Emma Goldman, Dorothy Day, Margaret Mead, Rachel Louise Carson and Margaret Fuller?

Posted by: Subversity on November 30, 2003 10:33 PM |

I get stroppy here. (Any excuse to have a pop at Thatcher)

Posted by: the absent student on December 1, 2003 11:36 AM |