To think Margaret Atwood is amazing

[Bibijayne]

Just that really.

silly Offred. She could've just identified as male and escaped her fate.

@MarkRuffaloCrumble

I'm a bit puzzled as to why you are speaking for all of her readers... Majority of people I know who love and actively read Atwood are not GC. Perhaps it is just the circles and friendship groups you have? I think she has a pretty broad audience. In the same way that feminism is a broad spectrum encompassing a range of experiences.

I dread to think what you’d call the TRA comments on twitter if you thought I was rude!

As I said, she clearly once knew what male and female was; it’s the basis for her books. Now to be completely denying this fact whilst posting such wild nonsense? Worrying.

I'm puzzled by the amount of posters who don't understand the different categories of women in the Handmaid's Tale and that the majority of women were not Handmaids. Only proven fertile women who had divorced/ behaved in other ways considered immoral by the state.

Would love to see how Gilead would respond to a trans woman as a handmaid Sent to Canada for re-education.. or a free life, to mix my universes!

@Bibijayne

I'm puzzled by the amount of posters who don't understand the different categories of women in the Handmaid's Tale and that the majority of women were not Handmaids. Only proven fertile women who had divorced/ behaved in other ways considered immoral by the state.

And trans women would have been considered immoral and sent straight to the fields

Mumsnet is all for women until one of them expresses an opinion which doesn’t fall into the accepted doctrine on trans rights. Then, her opinions are worthless and she clearly requires medical intervention for her ‘personality change’. Ahh, sweet and unsubtle misogyny.

As an Author, she writes amazing stories.
As another flat earther and science denier, not so much.
It’s a shame she’s ruined her masterpiece with this drivel tbh.

Sliding scale, my arse. She’s just thrown away my respect. Team JK here.

@Soubriquet almost certainly, or likely worse. It's an oppressive theocracy where your role and worth is dictated by very strict ideas of sex and gender.

And before someone shouts I’m being transphobic, in Gilead, you was supposed to be pious AND do your job of creating babies

They would have frowned at a potential male not doing what he was supposed to, which would be having sex with the women to create living babies

@Soubriquet - you are absolutely right in your description of Gilead.

I'm puzzled by the amount of posters who don't understand the different categories of women in the Handmaid's Tale No you're not! You are being incredulous. Because we do understand them.

Using the book, not the telly series... what about choice??

Categories of women - you don't see the issue with that language?

A group of men broke away from mainstream America and set up a male Utopia where women could live in one of a few ways, as dictated by the men and policed by some of the women.

Oh, how that sound so familiar today!

Yeah, Margaret Atwood, it's not the first opinion of hers that seem incongruous with her writing. Well, she can say what she likes and I can consider her view batshit and dismiss it. Imagine that, a disagreement without a grease fire.

In Gilead you wouldn't be allowed to be trans / express your transness. That would be "gender treachery".
In Gilead it wasn't only women who experienced loss of freedom - remember in the series Nick was allocated a disturbingly young wife, and was left with a choice to have sex with her or she would report him for gender treachery.

What this thread has shown me is that a lot of people did not understand The Handmaid’s Tale.

They would have frowned at a potential male not doing what he was supposed to, which would be having sex with the women to create living babies And how would they have dealt with him?

They wouldn't have killed him, he's a man and it would have been too public, someone man or woman would have known.

They would have sent him off to Canada... maybe along the not so secret railroad.. in the quiet, never to mention him again!

No. He would have faced the wall

Mumsnet is all for women until one of them expresses an opinion which doesn’t fall into the accepted doctrine on trans rights. Then, her opinions are worthless and she clearly requires medical intervention for her ‘personality change’. Ahh, sweet and unsubtle misogyny. Maybe because we are NOT Handmaids and MN has a place that GC women come to talk. Not sure I have ever seen any poster suggesting a woman needs medical intervention for her thoughts.. unless you are asserting TWAW!! In which case, yep! Just as we would for antone with an eating dosorder, depression or other altered mental state!

That we also talk across other boards means we an be found even in AIBU, being GC! Wot larks!!

I love Margaret Attwood's writing.
I find JRK's writing less skilled and a bit clunky (especially the HP series) but still enjoyable.

I don't believe biological sex is on a sliding scale, and I think TWATW.
I support both women in their rights to hold their own opinions without abuse.

No. He would have faced the wall Ah! yes!!

What this thread has shown me is that a lot of people did not understand The Handmaid’s Tale. Do tell...

Not sure I have ever seen any poster suggesting a woman needs medical intervention for her thoughts..

There is a post on literally the first post of this thread saying ‘If an elderly relative of mine had such a sudden personality change like that I’d be taking them to the doctors tbh.’.

Do you see no misogyny (not to mention ageism) in the suggestion that an ‘elderly’ woman must be suffering from some kind of medical condition for her to have expressed an opinion that’s supportive of trans rights?

proven fertile women

Ok, so this is related to the person's biology, correct? If they are in possession of a female sexed body that can conceive a child when raped by a male bodied person?

So can a woman in Gilead identify out of their imposed roles, whichever that is (econowife, martha, aunt, handmaid, whatever)? Can any person in possession of a female body, moral, immoral, fertile or not become a commander?

Curious certain posters have had this conversation many times. It's fine in threads about it, but seems to be deliberately brought in to derail other threads.

I've enjoyed the TV show of the Handmaid's Tale, but never read the book - is it worth it? The show infuriates me sometimes but it is a great watch. The stuff about how it all starts fairly innocuously is what stands out to me. Small chippings away at women's rights until suddenly they don't have any.