Handmaidens

[Terfulike]

I seem to be coming across these people more and more in the last week or so. Admittedly the video I describe below is 8 months old.

However, there are definitely more numerous postings/videos from young females (of the traditional type) who are trying to educate us GC Radfems about being too exclusionary, if you catch my drift, as such types as us may be physically threatening... no examples given.

My reason for posting is that one just got my goat quite big time (clip clip clopping across the bridge of reason).

This young person of the type traditionally (although admittedly not currently) referred to as female, or even young woman, (though obviously not these days - I acknowledge that these are considered by most Britons to be archaic terms - please forgive my usage mn) was describing people of the type who post on this particular site who are a bit exclusionary wink wink catch my drift with great disdain.

Anyway said person said that the word "lesbian" is basically an "uncomfortable" word with "*exclusionary connotations" and is "just wierd". Hmmmmm what did someone say about erasure?

Moreover GC Radfems are said by said vlogerette to be in positions of great power and influence these days ready to turn the heads of gullible young feminists in completely inappropriate directions.

Further, said person claims any discussions of paralegal philandering (quick crossword clue) are utterly ridiculous!

This highly commended video ends with scoffing at ideas of the f body being at all relevant to feminism.

Apologies if this has been discused before.

I was brought up in a very religious environment, so handmaiden means something very specific to me: it recalls those stories in the Bible where a female servant/slave is used as a means of furthering the patriarchy by bearing the patriarch's children. The woman has no choice in the matter, and if she stands up for herself she gets expelled, with no means of support (apart from God).

But those old stories were written by men for men. Hagar can't refuse Abraham. Mary can't say no to the angel. Instead she sings this song about how great it is to be chosen to become a teenage mother. 'Thanks for the unexpected fetus, God - how wonderful. Now I can fulfil my purpose in life, as determined for me by men.'

So when I see it in the trans debate I read it not so much as a woman who undermines other women for her own advantage, but a woman who can't see any other way to respond to the patriarchy. Or a woman who expresses gratitude to men for using her, because she believes her self worth depends on her investment in the patriarchy.

I don't think handmaiden is a sexist slur. I think it means a woman who has unfortunately not found enough freedom from patriarchal influences to do her own feminist analysis.

Why do people think "handmaid" is referring to actively, willingly engaging "traitors"?

Does it not come from the Atwood novel?

FWIW I think traitor is a perfectly non-gendered insult if you really want to band it around. No need to come up with a sex-specific name for something that already has a perfectly good word to describe it. Feeling it needs a particular word for women who display that behavior is, in my mind, misogyny.

Why do some people seem to struggle to understand that women can also be misogynistic?
Isn’t that completely obvious?
And completely unstandable that women might collude for personal gain or out of fear or just unwittingly and unthinkingly.. when all women live under sexism and misogyny every day?

Who would want to be chucked under that bus? But doesn’t mean they should be applauded or condoned or not objected to when it’s deliberate.

None of this means that the real anger isn’t already directed at those pulling the strings of power of course. Handmaidens by definition aren’t those people.

“So if you're going to insult her for it, I would suggest a non-gendered insult would be appropriate, because the behavior you're insulting is not a behavior you don't like on account of her gender”

It is, actually. Because it is behaviour which is specific to women.

Women do not "collude" with the patriarchy; women are subjugated by the patriarchy. If a woman goes against it that is commendable, but when she doesn't that is not mean she is traiterous.

I think it would be unusual to not find collaborators within subjugated groups who are willing to burn bridges with their group in order to curry favour with the oppressors. Case in point, the Jüdische Ghetto-Polizei

There's a difference between those who don't actively resist, and those who choose to be a mouthpiece for a regime which is actively seeking to remove women's rights and sex based protections.

But in this context “traitor” would be sex specific too. A man supporting the patriarchy isn’t a traitor.........

I don't engage or take seriously anyone who uses the term. It is just a cheap shot to try to belittle some one who doesn't agree with you.

But when a man is misogynistic, Rat, he is not being a traitor. He may be being many nasty things, but a traitor to the women he shares the feature of being a woman with is not one of them (for the avoidance of doubt MN "he" in this context refers to a man who is quite happy with his "identity" as a man).

I repeat - every oppressed group has a derogatory name for the people within its ranks who are traitors, and often those derogatory names ironically reference the attitudes of the class doing the oppressing. Women are allowed to partake of this long political tradition too in naming traitors to their class.

But that's not what "handmaiden" refers to, is it. It's certainly not those that it refers to in the book.

Oh, now you're insisting that words have proper meanings, and that we stick to tried and tested definitions

(Hands out snacks to those currently entering "dammit I can't not respond" circular argument hell.)

I do think there is a element of “woman, be nice” running through this thread.

It is, actually. Because it is behavior which is specific to women.

It's impossible for it not to be a behavior women can engage in because the patriarchy exists! Men can't collude in men's oppression because men are not oppressed. If you want to use the existence of the patriarchy - for which no woman alive today is responsible - to find a super special slur word to describe behavior that can only exist because the patriarchy exists, I don't think that's great tbh.

If you want to insult a woman for her perceived relationship with the patriarchy by all means do so. I just don't see why any feminist went out of their way to come up with its very own slur word, just to describe other women.

AAK
I’m conserving my blood pressure

Oh, now you're insisting that words have proper meanings, and that we stick to tried and tested definitions

Not at all, I was specifically asking why people thought it meant what they were using it to mean. I wasn't telling anyone what it had to mean. Read the words that are there, perhaps.

It's a bit early for , but I'm not sure is going to help much...

Oh, now you're insisting that words have proper meanings, and that we stick to tried and tested definitions

Words have meaning. Oh yes indeedy.

(Thanks AAK for snacks; offers to put kettle on; wades in deeper.)

Not sure I believe in agency. The fact is, women are very severely oppressed by patriarchy and choices are almost never free choices.

So I would say that is the difference between the handmaidens and the aunts for me in the book and that plays into how I view the use of the word (although i think use of the term actually stemmed from the common biblical source?)

The handmaidens were colluding by not resisting, as Offred says at one point there is nothing happening that she hasn't signed up for. However the risk they are facing in resisting are huge and their collusion doesn't actually get them privileges or power, not really, it's just better than the alternatives.

The Aunts are really the ones throwing other women under the bus for their own gain and they are doing it in a calculated way, although the alternatives for them are also perhaps not much better. Still they are the ones that really deserve the ire and insults.

If you look at the biblical handmaidens as well they clearly had no choice in the matter, they were slaves.

So I do agree that neither term is totally accurate for the young woman in the video and her blue haired friends. They are not women with few choices struggling to make their way through a society where they have no rights or options. And I don't think they are making an active decision to collude with their oppressors for material gain. Instead they are, in the main, young women who have been lied to about the source of their oppression and not given the critical thinking to work it out for themselves yet. (What do they teach them at these schools?) but who have the brains, tools and resources to work it out if they wanted to and would listen and engage critically with older, more experienced women.

Choice feminism is attractive, it's easy, it allows you to validate all your choices even if they don't really fit your ideology. It's easy to see why heterosexual young women who want to attract male partners can be conned into believing it. Many of them will grow out of it. Probably when they start having kids.

I've wandered off point a bit here but I guess I think of them as our prodigal daughters, they have taken every advantage we have made for them and squandered it but when they have learnt what the world is really like and come back to us starving and broken we will welcome them with open arms.

prosperous your poor friend. That’s horrible.

I think of them as our prodigal daughters, they have taken every advantage we have made for them and squandered it but when they have learnt what the world is really like and come back to us starving and broken we will welcome them with open arms.

Not at all, I was specifically asking why people thought it meant what they were using it to mean. I wasn't telling anyone what it had to mean. Read the words that are there, perhaps.

Welcome to our world.

You've got to stop making people laugh like this, I don't think a mouthful of tea would be good for my keyboard.

Like Cardsfor, I see the word handmaiden as from ancient history - the Bible, ancient Egypt. When I use it I'm referring to women who actively and eagerly promote patriarchal values and/or SJW clueless attacks on women's rights and feminism.

They are traitors the same way French collaborators were, or Uncle Tom is, so a sex specific insult is appropriate.

Calling them scabs involves knowing the trade union background and most young people won't have a clue.

I don't engage or take seriously anyone who uses the term. It is just a cheap shot to try to belittle some one who doesn't agree with you.

For all the explanations on this thread, that's generally how it is used. It's become a very lazy term that you see all over social media. 'She doesn't agree with me.... Handmaiden!'