The “classic nationalist narrative” of the Zimbabwean liberation movement of women fighters was that they participated as equals with the men, fought with men and that the liberation struggle was an example of great gender equality. The film Flame holds a complex argument against this narrative and challenges the historiography of Zimbabwe during the liberation movement. This film is controversial with its direct conflict with the massive narrative of the kind male guerillas. There are scenes depicting rape, inequality to women and how the women comrades had to demand to learn to protect themselves (Barnes, 2006; 241). Flame confronts the way men treated women during and after the war.
The film, Flame, directly contradicts the “classic nationalist …show more content…
Women’s active involvement in the liberation struggle did not lead to a resulting equality between women and men (Lyons, 2002; 306). The realities of women freedom fighters have been hidden. Women fighters very quickly re-embedded themselves in the conventional gendered roles back at home in their villages which show no equality between men and women. In the film, Flame and Liberty believe that they were not heroes after the struggle once they went back to their old lives. They did not see their contribution as powerful as men’s involvement (Barnes, 2006; 241). Many of the women war heroes were excluded from the celebrations and praise from liberation and those who challenged the social gender norms were called ‘prostitutes’ (Barnes, 2006; 250). This was because so many of the female guerillas were taken advantage of by men during the liberation movement and sex is seen as degrading for women. The “classic nationalist narrative” was that women acted like men and fought with and beside them during the liberation war and they were entitled to be treated like men and equals after the movement but this is contradicted by the film, Flame. A Legal Age of Majority Act and the Ministry of Women’s Affairs were created after the liberation movement to reduce the discrimination and eradicate inequality towards women but from the film, Flame, it can be seen that this did not work well (Barnes, 20016; 252). Women were not treated as equals, they were discriminated against, assaulted and taken advantage of and then degraded for something that was not their fault but men’s. This is a massive contradiction to the “classic nationalist
The film, Flame, directly contradicts the “classic nationalist …show more content…
Women’s active involvement in the liberation struggle did not lead to a resulting equality between women and men (Lyons, 2002; 306). The realities of women freedom fighters have been hidden. Women fighters very quickly re-embedded themselves in the conventional gendered roles back at home in their villages which show no equality between men and women. In the film, Flame and Liberty believe that they were not heroes after the struggle once they went back to their old lives. They did not see their contribution as powerful as men’s involvement (Barnes, 2006; 241). Many of the women war heroes were excluded from the celebrations and praise from liberation and those who challenged the social gender norms were called ‘prostitutes’ (Barnes, 2006; 250). This was because so many of the female guerillas were taken advantage of by men during the liberation movement and sex is seen as degrading for women. The “classic nationalist narrative” was that women acted like men and fought with and beside them during the liberation war and they were entitled to be treated like men and equals after the movement but this is contradicted by the film, Flame. A Legal Age of Majority Act and the Ministry of Women’s Affairs were created after the liberation movement to reduce the discrimination and eradicate inequality towards women but from the film, Flame, it can be seen that this did not work well (Barnes, 20016; 252). Women were not treated as equals, they were discriminated against, assaulted and taken advantage of and then degraded for something that was not their fault but men’s. This is a massive contradiction to the “classic nationalist