The Handmaid's Tale

[herewegogc]

Just watched the 3rd series. Anyone else?

I watch the handmaid's tale.

It is superb and really chilling..... And honestly, I find it really hard to understand how Margaret attwood could have written such a piece of work about mysogyny and not understand the current debate....

But then, I also watched Sarah pascoe's self penned co edy programme and was constantly thinking 'huh? Doesn't she realise that's really transphobic.....?'

..... And also her show last woman on earth, where she merrily went around the globe imagining that if she was the last woman on earth she would be learning how to whittle rhubarb or read alloud in factories...... We all know the last woman on earth won't be allowed to do anything else except have babies.

I guess I wonder if a lot of people really look very hard at the issue before voicing an opinion that they can't back out of. How can anyone see what is happening with Marion Millar and not make comparisons to Gilead?!

Sorry, I have lept straight yo the conclusion you are looking for a debate on attwood and her comments on the debate?

Yes Gilead is getting ever closer...women removed from jobs and education in Afghanistan, the silencing of women such as MM, Maya and JK, but also women’s resistance and sisterhood runs through it. Utterly horrified but well worth watching. Agree that I cannot understand Atwood’s view given how she wrote the original book.

Yes I watched it. I look forward to more.

I was a little confused about what was going on in the final scene. I thought series 3 was good though.

What is interesting about the final episodes of this series is that June is still at the mercy of men. Albeit these men are more polite. Also the irony of Canada being a sanctuary has not escaped me.

Thus, June and the Handmaids suffered the blatant exercise of male power over women. Then finds in the sanctuary city, the same old, same old.

@herewegogc

What is interesting about the final episodes of this series is that June is still at the mercy of men. Albeit these men are more polite. Also the irony of Canada being a sanctuary has not escaped me.

Oh you just wait until you get to the end of season 4!

@catzwhiskas

Yes Gilead is getting ever closer...women removed from jobs and education in Afghanistan, the silencing of women such as MM, Maya and JK, but also women’s resistance and sisterhood runs through it. Utterly horrified but well worth watching. Agree that I cannot understand Atwood’s view given how she wrote the original book.

From interviews I'd say that she clearly doesn't understand much about it, what the ideology says, how it is playing out. And only sees it through a political lens, good progressives, bad anti-people.

But she's always been kind of a twit.

I don't understand the point that you're all trying to make about Margaret Attwood - genuinely. She wrote The Handmaid's Tale in 1985.

What's the issue? (I really mean this as a genuine question!)

But she's always been kind of a twit.

@BIWI

I don't understand the point that you're all trying to make about Margaret Attwood - genuinely. She wrote The Handmaid's Tale in 1985.

What's the issue? (I really mean this as a genuine question!)

She is fully signed on to gender ideology. People wonder how she can be when, in the book, it seems as if she understands that oppression of women is related to their biological, reproductive role.

Sorry - you'll have to explain that a bit more. I really don't understand what you mean.

"People wonder how she can be when, in the book, it seems as if she understands that oppression of women is related to their biological, reproductive role."

What do you mean by this? Sorry to be dense, but I really don't understand you!

Atwood believes that men can become women.

That would imply that sex is of no consequence and that there is no difference between men and women.

The world she created in Gilead was entirely based on sex differences and power imbalance between the sexes, men oppressing women. None of the handmaids had the option of identifying as men. In Gilead men use their strength and size to force women into reproductive and domestic slavery. So it is a bit odd that what she appeared to understand in 1985 she apparently has no grasp of in 2021. Now she seems to think that sex is irrelevant and the handmaids should have just identified as commanders, if they didn’t like their identity as handmaids so probably they were really happy as handmaids after all

@BIWI

Sorry - you'll have to explain that a bit more. I really don't understand what you mean.

"People wonder how she can be when, in the book, it seems as if she understands that oppression of women is related to their biological, reproductive role."

What do you mean by this? Sorry to be dense, but I really don't understand you!

Atwood thinks TWAW, so she thinks 'woman' is a category for both male and female people, and there is no separate class of people who used to be called women (adult female humans) who are distinct from another class of people - adult male humans.

The book is about women having their rights removed. In Atwood's current world view, all those women would have to do would be to say 'I am a man', and they could have rights again.

If Atwood's world view was correct, a dystopian society like in the Handmaid's tale couldn't exist, because everyone would just opt into the dominant sex (gender) class. Nobody would choose to be a woman. The fact that women in such societies can't do this shows that Atwood's viewpoint of TWAW and TMAM is a fiction.

Anyway I don’t want to get sidetracked from discussing the series.

herewegogc I agree with your observation absolutely it is very much the case that June remains 100% dependent on men to achieve her objectives and on “handling” those men. It is no surprise that she is angry. The power structures remain in place but some men are either finding their aims align with June’s or I don’t know they are indulging her because they can and it amuses them or perhaps using her, playing games that involve using her to hurt their enemies.

I can’t watch The Handmaid’s Tale without thinking of commercial surrogacy and those horrible surrogacy contracts in some US states which erode the surrogate mother’s rights, sometimes using the threat of financial ruin to enforce compliance.

I’m also alarmed by recent attempts in the UK to change the legal definitions of “mother” and “father”. This would supposedly be kind and trans-inclusive, but it could also challenge a birth mother’s automatic parental responsibility for her child.

Maybe I’m paranoid, but I keep noticing attempts to legally and or culturally sever pregnancy from motherhood. And it worries me, because I don’t think this is in the best interest of mothers or their babies.

And it worries me, because I don’t think this is in the best interest of mothers or their babies. yes

Maybe I’m paranoid, but I keep noticing attempts to legally and or culturally sever pregnancy from motherhood. And it worries me, because I don’t think this is in the best interest of mothers or their babies.

Yes, I attended antenatal classes recently. Towards the end of the course, I noticed that literature was changed to remove the word 'mother' and replaced with 'birthing parent'. So whereas at the start of the course we were given a course outline that said something like 'in the last session mothers and birth partners will be placed in separate groups', by the time it actually came to the last session, the literature had been re-written to say 'birthing parents and birth partners will be placed in separate groups'.

Of course I was furious and made my feelings known on the feedback form, but there is definitely a push to de-couple the concepts of women and mothers from biology. As though the reproductive roles of the sexes are interchangeable.

Yes Cattenberg, I feel that way too. I also agree with EdgeOfACoin about the harms of gender neutral language, wow how striking to see that change during the course of your antenatal classes.

I recently heard about the work of a Jungian analyst on a podcast (this Jungian life), I think his name was Brian Feldman, he worked with mothers who were struggling to adjust to motherhood by means of sharing stories about archetypal ideas of motherhood the aim being giving them meaning and significance in their roles as mothers. Apparently his results were very positive, the storytelling was inspiring and supportive to these mothers. As I was listening to this it made me think of the psychological impact on us of denying motherhood has any meaning or significance, of actually denying it exists at all in any way distinct from “parenthood”. In fact the same could be said for fathers. They lose their distinct role in the child’s life too.

This is also what many of the birth and breastfeeding groups are losing, they perhaps underestimate how much of their support was about the celebration of motherhood, and the meaning and purpose that gave to those attending their groups. That belief in the significance of your role in your child’s life can be something which really helps you through all the daily challenges of mothering. Mothers matter, but the new paradigm seems to be that we don’t, now we are just another component in a production line. I can see why some people believe the end goal and driving force behind these changes is transhumanism or that the human body and the human family is the final frontier of capitalism.

Thanks for the explanation - all makes sense now. (I think I was just being spectacularly thick last night

@DaisiesandButtercups

Yes Cattenberg, I feel that way too. I also agree with EdgeOfACoin about the harms of gender neutral language, wow how striking to see that change during the course of your antenatal classes.

I recently heard about the work of a Jungian analyst on a podcast (this Jungian life), I think his name was Brian Feldman, he worked with mothers who were struggling to adjust to motherhood by means of sharing stories about archetypal ideas of motherhood the aim being giving them meaning and significance in their roles as mothers. Apparently his results were very positive, the storytelling was inspiring and supportive to these mothers. As I was listening to this it made me think of the psychological impact on us of denying motherhood has any meaning or significance, of actually denying it exists at all in any way distinct from “parenthood”. In fact the same could be said for fathers. They lose their distinct role in the child’s life too.

This is also what many of the birth and breastfeeding groups are losing, they perhaps underestimate how much of their support was about the celebration of motherhood, and the meaning and purpose that gave to those attending their groups. That belief in the significance of your role in your child’s life can be something which really helps you through all the daily challenges of mothering. Mothers matter, but the new paradigm seems to be that we don’t, now we are just another component in a production line. I can see why some people believe the end goal and driving force behind these changes is transhumanism or that the human body and the human family is the final frontier of capitalism.

It tooks all this gender nonsense for me to realise just how powerful and transformative the women's changing room at the gym has been for me.

To have this safe space with all these different female bodies and seeing women of all ages, shapes and sizes be so very comfortable with themselves and others in this shared female space - well it did more for me and improving my own body issue stuff than any amount of therapy ever did.

Womens shared spaces, language and experiences really really matter.

JackieWeaversZoomAc I absolutely agree with you about women’s changing rooms too and being comfortable together as women of all ages and body types. I found it really helped me with body image issues when I was younger to be in such spaces. I do believe that many of us need these women only spaces, they can often be restful and supportive even when that isn’t their intended purpose.

I have known all along how wonderfully transformative the ladies changing room at the gym is. I have tried to brief the other women but they have little idea or interest in what I'm talking about.
Just one....even small...dangling penis would change all that in a microsecond. This thought peaked me several years ago.

@DaisiesandButtercups

Anyway I don’t want to get sidetracked from discussing the series.

herewegogc I agree with your observation absolutely it is very much the case that June remains 100% dependent on men to achieve her objectives and on “handling” those men. It is no surprise that she is angry. The power structures remain in place but some men are either finding their aims align with June’s or I don’t know they are indulging her because they can and it amuses them or perhaps using her, playing games that involve using her to hurt their enemies.

Yes, it is so well written - the agent bloke is using and exploiting her so very politely. The series is so well written and outstrips the book by some way I think. Meanwhile Attwood's current TWAW attitude is a complete puzzle. How can she possibly believe this?

Yes the agent, and Joseph but I sometimes question even Luke and Nick. The structural power imbalance seems to make it impossible for a man and a woman to relate to each other in a genuinely healthy way.

@DaisiesandButtercups

Yes the agent, and Joseph but I sometimes question even Luke and Nick. The structural power imbalance seems to make it impossible for a man and a woman to relate to each other in a genuinely healthy way.

Yes, when Luke sent her off to Nick to get into in Hannah - that felt exploitative