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.

This is interesting, women in Poland wearing Handmaiden outfits protesting Trump:

www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/the-handmaids-tale-poland-donald-trump-visit-hulu-speech-a7828206.html

I was at the Cambridge University Open Day yesterday. In the Maths department I saw a young American Woman wearing a GREEN DRESS in the same colour as the Wives.
It was quite long, long sleeves with sort of knitted cuffs, and wrap round and tie waist.
It was about 85 degrees C yesterday, and everyone else was wearing shorts and T shirts, or sun dresses. I could only assume she was a member of some strict religious sect. She was wearing flat shoes, but no head covering.
I didn't have the courage to actually speak to her and ask.
It freaked me out, somewhat.
Any ideas, anyone ?

Sounds possibly like LDS, travelled my cousin is one and I don't know a whole lot about the doctrine but I do know they are very conservative wrt dress. They also (I believe) have to wear vests to protect themselves from the evil of people not of that religion

She could have been a missionary.

I saw this today in the Mail too.

www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-4669840/Manal-Al-Sharif-defied-Saudi-Arabia-s-female-driving-ban.html

"A women's rights activist who was jailed after she bravely defied Saudi Arabia's female driving ban has opened up about the ordeal.

Manal Al-Sharif, who now lives in Sydney, spent nine days behind bars after being charged with 'driving while female' after she uploaded a YouTube video of herself travelling through the streets of Khobar in May 2011.

Saudi Arabia is the only country in the world that forbids women from driving - but the ban did not deter the now 38-year-old from taking back control over her life."

It sent shivers up my spine, its so worrying whats happening in the states right now with the far right religious zealots but this is country Law now in Saudi.

Re the Trump protesters, how odd, do they protest agaisnt saudi and Whabbi doctrine too? Women can still drive in the states?

It feels like it's become a bit awkward to criticise what may be regarded as misogyny when it's driven by interpretations of Islam, because of the possibility of perceived Islamophobia/racism.

Personally, as a white, female agnostic, I feel quite free to criticise Christianity. Islam not so much.

Personally I think it's more to do with the fact that America can influence Poland far more than Saudi Arabia can. No one gives a shit what the laws are in, say, Papua New Guinea do they, or Burkina Faso. Apart from the people living there I mean. Saudi Arabia has always seemed to cultivate this image of we do what we want but we don't comment on anyone else. That's how they manage to trade so successfully with the west. But most of the world cares about America and particularly other western countries. Particularly particularly, vulnerable western countries like Poland.

I would agree with papa new guinea but when we know Saudi is behind terrorism, Wahhabi mosques - the spread of hate and fear and the very real, very now subjugation of women, that spreads in the west through these very mosques, i would disagree American has more of an influence.

I mean There was a very powerful scene re being cut - FGM - happens now in some cultures mostly from cultures with dominant Muslim religion , and a very powerful scene re driving and we know women in Saudi are not allowed to drive - but yeah! Lets protest against Trump.

Bizarre. I guess its easier - he is an easier target.

I think Saudi would be a great target to protest against.

So much shit going on in Saudi and it's appalling our Government trades with them.

I guess its easier - he is an easier target

Trump is more relevant to most Westerner's lives...

THT draws on Christian doctrine to make its point. Of course it has wider relevance but to use a western book written to resonant with people living in white Christian countries to protest an Islamic regime would be an odd choice.

On a tangent... over on Facebook I'm involved in a discussion with other drama teachers which started off being about whether a school should be able to impose a dress code for staff and has somehow turned into a surreal dicussion where most are insisting that girls should have to wear shorts under school skirts to be allowed to join in drama lessons. I seem to be one of very few teachers involved saying that this should not happen but others are throwing out justifications involving it being "distracting for boys and male teachers" and "not modest" I am gobsmacked. If this is being routinely pushed in bog standard secondary schools then what is going on?

Male teachers are distracted by the female students underwear choices...

Christ, am I extraordinarily naive or is that really worrying?

I don't think Atwood used ONE particular male dominated religion to inspire the behaviours in the book, I think she used ALL of them, to some degree or another.

Certainly.

What's worrying is that female teachers are promoting that view to impressionable teenagers.

Agreed, but why do they think adult male teachers are even looking at their young female students in that way?

No idea. It's certainly a bizarre thing to be so concerned about that they're making up rules about girls' clothing.

Surely if any school has even the slightest concern that a male teacher is thinking in that way, they ought to deal with it.

Can I join the debate as this is something I'm wildly conflicted about.

1. Do female drama teachers wear clothes and perform activities that put them at risk of flashing their knickers to the class? If not, why not?

1. Back when the trend was for boys to wear their trousers around their knees I had no problem in saying to boys 'pull your trousers up, no one wants to see your pants'.

1. Teenage boys will, of course, be distracted by the prospect of seeing girls' underwear. This is natural, they are full of hormones and telling them that they just shouldn't look isn't really going to help the situation.

1. No one is going to tell boys that they should wear shorts to do drama because they are already appropriately dressed. The problem in society is that women and girls' expected attire is not practical. From frilly dresses so that they can't climb trees effectively to short skirts so they have to be careful how they sit and get out of cars. Boys do not have these concerns, they can do what they like and not have to worry about flashing underwear.

1. I don't want to see my pupils' underwear, male or female. I don't think men being uncomfortable with seeing female pupils' underwear signals anything sinister. People who say 'it might distract male teachers' are making it difficult for males to say 'actually no, that's not the reason I don't want to see it'.

1. Girls, far more than boys, seek to amend their school uniform to make it look attractive (which tends to coincide with a more sexualised look - tight trousers, short tight skirts, loads of make-up). Boys, far more than girls seek to amend their uniform to make it comfortable. I'm not convinced that it's feminist to allow girls to wear 'immodest' uniforms that flash their knickers, show off their arse, display their cleavage, whatever because it basically approves of the focus on their appearance, while we stand patiently day after day telling boys to put their ties back on and tuck their shirts in without any controversy.

I agree with your point 6 noble entirely. I actually think girls roll up their skirts because it's fashionable rather than them wanting to look sexualised but I think adapted uniforms look bloody scruffy and should be discouraged whether boy or girl.

But why is it fashionable for schoolgirls to roll their skirts up? Girls have been rolling their skirts up since our mums were at school. Hemlines in actual fashion have moved up and down regularly over the years, while the fashion for schoolgirls has remained 'show as much leg as possible, and the bottom of your butt cheeks if you dare'. Same with school trousers, the 'fashion' is always for tight trousers or leggings that show off legs and arse.
A fashion is something that changes. It hasn't for schoolgirls since time immemorial.

Yes that's true - it's never been fashionable to have skirts over the knee...

I completely agree it's not at all feminist to allow girls to wear skimpy clothing to school. It's the opposite because it reinforces the idea that they need to show off their bodies to get recognition.

it's never been fashionable to have skirts over the knee...

Pretty sure we had pencil skirts at mid-calf in the '80s - which were complained about by teachers, because you can't walk with a normal stride in them. At other times, skirts did get rolled up. Ra-Ra skirts and puff-balls were also unacceptable.

I think that whatever the fashion, there will always be ways for schoolchildren to adapt uniform, and there will always be something for teachers to coming about. And I think if that's the worst a school.has to worry about, they're not doing too badly.

For "coming about" read "complaining about". Bloody phone.

Has there ever been a fashion for girls to wear comfy trousers? Like the boys get to wear?