Is The Witches offensive to disabled people?

YorkshireLass01

Oh for goodness sake! I'm sorry, but it's a film, it's from a work of fiction, a children's book. I don't see films and TV as real life, nor should anyone else (unless it's a documentary or biopic of course). If I settle down to watch something I have been looking forward to, I don't look for things to be offended at or that are discriminatory, I just enjoy the story. Why is everyone permanently offended these days and always looking for something to scream "Discrimination"?

My dad had no fingers whatsoever on his right hand, he amputated them in an accident at work when I was 11, but neither I, nor my family and friends ever saw him as evil or bad. We knew the difference between a character in a book, TV programme or film and real life!

I am certain that if Roald Dahl was alive, he would be shaking his head and laughing at the ridiculous fuss being made. Just enjoy the film for goodness sake!

Tori_Scope

I understand your point @YorkshireLass01, but I think for me it's a case of whether the depiction was necessary or properly justifiable.

I don't think giving the witch a limb difference adds anything to the story, and when you measure that against the potential negative effects, it's not worth it in my opinion. Although you might not interpret the depiction of the witch in this way, others might do, even subconsciously, and this can perpetuate negative stereotypes that we should really be avoiding.

I think it also indicates a wider lack of thought or consideration for disabled people by the filmmakers, so this could be a good opportunity for disabled people to make it clear that distasteful representations won't be tolerated, and that positive representations of disabled people can be really important, especially to children.

I'd be interested to hear more on your thoughts about it though!

YorkshireLass01

Hello @Tori_Scope , I just don't think children will take any notice of whether a character has fingers or not and they certainly wouldn't attach it to real life if they did notice. It never fails to have me shaking my head when I read outrage like this. Why take offence at everything and see things so seriously?

She isn't a disabled person, she's a character in a film. In the original film (which scares me stupid to this day and I'm 60!) the witch Anne Hathaway portrays in this new version, transforms into a grotesque, skeletal, hairless, crone (as does Anne Hathaway looking at the stills online), and I don't think people with anorexia, alopecia, or any disfigurements took offence at it.

For centuries witches have been portrayed as old hags, with a pointy nose, warts, long pointy, skeletal fingers, hunchback, and many other things seen as a disability, but no-one has stood up and screamed 'That's discriminatory!'  Because they have the intelligence to know what is fiction. The Hunchback of Notre Dame is another fine example, people could have pointed a finger and been offended, but they didn't.

I really think it's high time people took a step back and allowed others to have an imagination, to enjoy entertainment just as its meant to be, and to have the intelligence to know what is real and what isn't, without pointing out whatever offends them. Yes, we can't all be the same (thank goodness) and I wouldn't want to be. I am more offended by someone using a disabled parking spot when they're not disabled nor do they have blue badges, than I am by a character in a film and that is how it should be. Stand up for real life events.

Grinchy

I agree with @YorkshireLass01, i don't think the filmmakers were meaning to offend, i've worked on films with creatures in in the past, these things go through numerous designs and meetings before they settle on a final design, as an overall creation, honestly they would have thrown the missing limbs in as an afterthought, i'm not familair with the book its based on, is there no mention of missing fingers or limbs in the story?

YorkshireLass01

@Tori_Scope and @Grinchy , I saw a report on this yesterday and it isn't that there are missing digits at all! The witch in question has elongated fingers! So all this shock and offence is totally misappropriated; My RE teacher in middle school had extra long fingers, we were all fascinated by them, but we didn't disrespect him at all.

Yes there is a mention in the book about the witch and her fingers in the description Roald Dahl gives of her having hands like cats claws, this is why she wears gloves. According to the official Roald Dahl site this is how to spot a witch and no mention at all of  there being any digits missing. https://www.roalddahl.com/blog/2015/october/how-to-recognise-a-witch

In the end, it is only a children's fantastical story, written by a wonderful author who has brought pleasure to millions of people, all over the world. If we adults are going to pull every single adaptation apart because it offends us (I just enjoy the films and books!), then it's a sad old world we live in. You could pull apart a lot of children's films, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, with Oompa Lumpa's for instance!

Take a breath, count to ten and think, does it really matter in the grand scheme of things, when people have much bigger problems to deal with? NO!

Tori_Scope

I've attached a picture of the Grand High Witch below @YorkshireLass01, where you can see that she does having missing digits.



And the fact that there's no mention of missing digits in the book is one of the reasons why so many people are upset I think, as the film adaptation has added this as an extra feature. 

Do you think it being an afterthought could make it worse in some people's eyes @Grinchy? 

Richard_Scope

For me, it's the fact that the 'missing fingers' have been added and play no part on the original work. The filmmaker is deliberately using a physical difference to great a cheap reaction. @YorkshireLass01, I agree that on occasion people can be a little too sensitive about certain stories in the media but these don't even look like cat's claws. 
We have to accept that 'some' people will see this film and weaponise it against people with differences. It is great that you and your family accepted your dad's accident. My daughter accepts my disability as she knows no different but the same cannot be said of people in society and that's the point.

[Deleted User]

I almost ended up with 6 fingers on my left hand instead of the normal 5, to this day I still have a skin blemish where the sixth digit would've been.

It's a big part of the reason I don't like Salt and Vinegar crisps lol, the Salt gets in it.

Grinchy

Hey @Tori_Scope
i'm sorry that people are being offended, i don't think that was the intent, just another cool thing to add to the design in there eyes, its a shame that its caused offence, i can understand that its upsetting if you have a similar impairment,

newborn

It goes much further.   The word 'witch' should not be used.  Historically, it was an excuse to torture, drown or burn to death women who were unpopular, were isolated, were old, or were not pretty.   To this day, some cultures still use it as an excuse to torture and even kill members of their family or community who are scapegoats or atypical in some way.   There's a link in fairy tales between physical beauty and inner virtue, versus any disfigurement, or even old age, with inner ugliness.  The perpetuation of these stories, and the word 'witch', is encouragement of hatred to women, hatred to old women, hatred to disabled or disfigured or merely non-pretty people.    If these fairy stories used skin colour as an outer proof of inner evil, it would be obvious to everyone it was always wrong, and must be stopped at once.

[Deleted User]

newborn said:

It goes much further.   The word 'witch' should not be used.  Historically, it was an excuse to torture, drown or burn to death women who were unpopular, were isolated, were old, or were not pretty.   To this day, some cultures still use it as an excuse to torture and even kill members of their family or community who are scapegoats or atypical in some way.   There's a link in fairy tales between physical beauty and inner virtue, versus any disfigurement, or even old age, with inner ugliness.  The perpetuation of these stories, and the word 'witch', is encouragement of hatred to women, hatred to old women, hatred to disabled or disfigured or merely non-pretty people.    If these fairy stories used skin colour as an outer proof of inner evil, it would be obvious to everyone it was always wrong, and must be stopped at once.

That's a pretty outdated opinion mate, used by Daily Mail reading racists who hate the world and everyone in it who doesn't conform to their version of what's "normal"

Not suggesting you're of that persuasion though.

Richard_Scope

I have several friends who are proud to be called 'Witch'.

newborn

Richard that is funny, a great way to turn an insult away!  But for cultures where ia belief in the existence of evil witches (including childrent)   the word is actually causing harm, the acceptance that there is such a thing as witches and they are evil is really not something funny at all.    It is like accepting that little girls must have the equivalent , essentially, of castration mutilation. by using the mild  term 'female circumcision'.  The campaigners  battled hard to reject the use of the word, as a first step to reject the practice  

Richard_Scope

I wasn't making a joke @newborn.

newborn

Oh no, separating the two things.  Your friends who say "yep, I'm a witch and proud of it" are being funny and being empowered and 'reclaiming' and so on, which is all good stuff.    Originally, this started I think with people happy to call themselves 'white witches', to show they were not doing what used to be called 'black magic' (not the confectionary, but making 'spells' against people, and so the 'white witches' would only do 'spells' to help people.  This would probably have started about the time of the Hippies movement.

., People who are not your friends use the word in a way which is completely different.

 I actually shared a house in London with a lovely African doctor, working as a minicab driver, but who worried a lot about his ex wife, in another part of London with their children.   His concern was exactly that, her belief in witches.  There wasn't much he could do to protect one of them.  Her church leader was keen to do various rituals because they had declared the child was a witch, or a witch who needed the 'devil' to be forced out of her body, or something.  The father worried that the ceremonies were  frightening the child, branding her as evil, witch, devil-possessed, liable to be dangerous to all around her because she might curse them or put spells on them or kill them with her witch-stare, which is a lot of responsibility for a six year old.

That little girl would not find the fairy stories and films a pleasant entertainment.

WelshBlue

Interesting thread.  Made me realise I'm a baddie ...

Shaved head because I don't like combovers with a centre parting that starts by an ear ... missing digits from an accident, alongside a clawed hand from VWF .. plus facial scarring/ disfigurement from a car crash

I personally don't find things portrayed on screen as offensive, but can see how others do.

I'm in the process of designing tattoos to embrace my differences, will be human with inked cyborg parts.
May as well give people something interesting to look at whilst they take not so covert looks.  Will leave them wondering even more what happened to me