The Handmaid's Tale Vol 2

[PacificDogwod]

I go to work and this is what happens: the previous thread fills up when I have pertinent things to say!

Hope nobody minds, I've taken the opportunity to start a new one before the Offspring demand food and the likes...

One of the masterful strikes of strategic genius of the new regime is the division and envy between everybody and everybody: men vs women, women in different roles vs other women, high ranking vs low ranking.
No solidarity is allowed - even the partnered Handmaids were half companion and have guard. Never knowing who might be an Eye and who to trust must be soul destroying.

I think Serena is quite a tragic figure - in the book and in the TV series. She must feel so betrayed by the ideals she fought for and that she is now kind of forced to uphold because otherwise what would her life be?? Admitting that she supporting a world view that while giving her some kind of social status by dint of her husband's role, considers her without value as she cannot have children would render everything she stands for invalid, and herself by extension.

The author who wrote a book about women being able to electrocute men by touch thereby causing a power change over (sorry, I cannot remember either name ) was talking on Radio Scotland today. She said the idea for her book came from when she wondered why so many mechanisms in society seem to go back to the fact that 'more men can throw a woman across a room than the other way around'. It's a depressing thought that physical strength underpins so much.

I think the Mexicans would pretend just like the Gileadeans do, or that's the plan. The Gilead regime has convinced itself it's all fine and lovely. Whether or not the Mexicans would be capable of the same cognitive dissonance is open to question given they're apparently not a loony misogynist theocracy, but right now I think the Gilead commanders are thinking they will because Handmaids is a great system so why wouldn't you be able to export it?
(I can imagine the Mexicans wanting the fertile women but not the crazy religious ritual, so if they had taken the handmaids they would have come up with their own system for managing them, which could be more or less brutal. I don't think Gilead would be monitoring what happened to the handmaids they sold once they got their hands on the currency.)

Interesting interview with the producer which explains why they removed the white supremacy from the tv adaptation:

tvline.com/2017/01/07/the-handmaids-tale-hulu-series-black-moira/

The Mexican ambassador was quite clear though I think, that the mistreatment of the Handmaids is a necessary evil for the greater good. When she said 'I can't help you'... it's because she won't. She wants more babies to be born, regardless of how it affects all those women.

The Ambassador would surely he escorted by a Mexican security agent. Of course, they would gave their sources and would look to disrupt Gilead. It is a dog-eat-dog world.

The set up in Mexico could be more efficient. Sperm screening of the men, handmaid women living together in a procreation house being visited by the men. Multiple men to one woman. Possibly artificial insemination rather than rape, although there could be lots of soiree type affairs where everyone would be encouraged to shag.

But regardless they would be kept prisoner still. In many ways it would be more palatable to 'rescue' someone from Gilead and keep them prisoner but not rape and mutilate them, then to consider taking on a virtuous woman who believes procreation is gods work. Especially since the Mexicans clearly aren't following the Gilead interpretation of Christianity, what with having a female ambassador.

If it doesn't matter what happens after, that makes the trade a one time deal. Which would involve an awful lot of trust on the Mexicans part that they were actually getting fertile women. Surely they would cover their arse more than that. A deal like this would be set up in instalments.

Oh and I imagine Gilead wants weapons in exchange. Its always weapons with a regime like that.

A Mexican security double agent is what I was thinking. The Mexican Ambassador would believe him to be hers.

They've been setting this up for ages, I assumed that included infiltrating the Mexican ranks with Gilead agents.

I'm probably too much of a conspiracy theorist!

When June mentioned being traded for chocolate I was wondering why it didn't occur to her that they wanted weapons

I can't decide whether the potential for Mexico to do it "ethically" after buying the handmaids is better or worse. At least gilead has their squiweff religion at the base of it, its less umm selfish.

The thing is, the Gilead leaders told the Mexicans that the handmaids have chosen their roles, that they're willing volunteers. So by that logic they could be equally willing once they get sent to Mexico. If the Mexicans buy that argument, they could be intending to go down the artificial insemination route, or consensual sex - not realising that it's done through rape in Gilead.

It doesn't make sense, of course, and certainly wouldn't as soon as the handmaids arrived and presumably told the truth.

Anyway, I don't think it's just about producing children. If it was, fertile women and men would have the status and power. But it's more complicated than that, isn't it? There's misogyny, religion and presumably money that come into it.

Oh interesting - i has thought the white supremacy had been removed to make it more about the suppression of women. Have one single bias in other words. Though I did feel that for this lack of racism in society to have been believable then of those in power (and their wives) should have included several who wherent white (all the commaders are white aren't they?)

Even with that aside though it does make it less reflective of evangelism. In a situation where all those that are putting themselves in a position of power are white males the chances are those they suppress would be anyone, man or woman, who isn't white, and then women.

If no children have been born in an area for six years, and they trade some "free choice" handmaids from gilead for whatever, what do you think would happen to the handmaids once they get to Mexico and admit they aren't there out of free choice. I don't see that ending with them being released to live whatever life they want, sadly :(

She wasn't steralised she had her clitoris removed so she felt no pleasure.

Without the religion, my best guess would be handmaids being bought as wives by rich men, and being raped by them.

The males in charge did all seem to be white.

As do the wives.

I'm sure I saw one black wife at the gala last night?

.

Some of the children were black and didn't appear to be mixed race so I wasn't sure whether they were born before gilead and stolen or born to black handmaids by black commanders?

But yeah the idea that all the upper classes are white just reflects American society as it is now anyway. It didn't have to be deliberate as such.

So if they are trading handmaids, why the big effort to lie about them being happy etc? It doesn't make sense does it?

For the same reason you emphasise animal welfare and udder health and so on, if you sell a herd of cows. Happier, less-stressed animals are more likely to be more fertile and more productive. It is pretty much exactly like selling a herd of cows, really - the best handmaids would be producing a new baby every year.

Unlike cows, they probably can't admit to the outside world that they aren't voluntary Handmaid's, because I assume that for much of the world outside Gilead, slavery and slave-trading is still frowned upon, and it wouldn't do Mexico's standing in the rest of the world much good to be openly trading women. It'll all be done as a voluntary cultural exchange on the surface (but only if Gilead gets whatever Mexico is offering. Like you do in a trade, rather than a donation.)

That is true AdalindSchade, but if we are to accept that this all white society, that are expressing their evangelical bible based beliefs on society aren't racist then it couldn't be a reflection of American society in that sense. We'd need to be led to believe that the society Gilead came from didn't have a white supremis in the upper classes.

Look at Trump, it's not difficult to believe he'd (If he had total power) happily ship 'Children of Ham' off in trucks is it?

What I'm trying to say is that if the writer wanted to remove this part of the book for the reasons he stated in the link above then the acceptance of diversity would have been throughout all society

It's not believable that a powerful white bigoted man would want a child that didn't reflect him exactly, unless the society already as without racism.

I can just about accept his excuse for a younger Serna Joy.

I do find it scary when Trump talks about religion.

'I can't decide whether the potential for Mexico to do it "ethically" after buying the handmaids is better or worse. At least gilead has their squiweff religion at the base of it, its less umm selfish.'

Yeah, but the religion has been constructed by cherry picking and altering the Bible in order to justify what they want to do, rather than being something they can't avoid because of their beliefs. It's sheer hypocrisy.

I find it scary when Trump talks.

If the rest of the world is suffering falling birthrates too I'd be very surprised if there weren't alternative women-entrapment / baby making systems in those other countries. Slavery isn't all that repulsive to human morality really, it's a pretty standard response through history to scarce resources.

It's just not believable to me that the Mexican Ambassador would ask if she was happy. 'In good health' - definitely. Check birth records - of course. Happy? Who gives a toss, why pretend. Why would they think these women would be willing to go have kids with non-believers, if they are currently happy then she plans to make them unhappy.

Unless maybe Mexico are teetering on the edge of deciding trade with Gilead or war with Gilead? Maybe it was a clever way of gauging whether if they attacked, the women would willingly run and come with them?

I'm reminded of rich people who hire poor Indian women to be surrogates. The Indian woman gets housed and looked after and paid, they are advertised as happy with the arrangements and doing it out of choice. But is it free choice when large sums of money are involved?

I just googled, and found that commercial surrogacy is being banned in India so they are moving the clinics to Cambodia. Clearly some people felt there were issues with using women's bodies for rich people to reproduce.

www.google.co.uk/amp/www.aljazeera.com/amp/indepth/features/2016/06/nepal-indian-surrogacy-clinics-move-cambodia-160614112517994.html

I was also reminded of the film (a true story) The Whistleblower, where she's asking the women in the bar if they were trafficked, and they're all too scared to say yes.

They all said they were there voluntarily - despite being trafficked into prostitution, and tortured, beaten, witnessing their friend's murder.