As was mentioned earlier in the thread the sudden conversion of society to Mormon North Korea is implausible. But that sort of stuff has happened in other places, like Iran or Afghanistan.
But telling a story about women in Iran would be boring. So let’s tell the same story, except in America, that way the audience will care.
And the transition has to happen fast, so we can follow the arc of a more or less modern American woman who gets enslaved as a handmaid. If that means we have to telescope 40 years of social change into 4 years, well, there you go.
The difference was that most of the “coming to a strasse near you” horrific stuff in Germany was targetted at easily hateable minorities - the Jews, the Gays, the Gypsies - not literally 50% of the population.
Also, things like the premise in THT become implausible because of what happened in Germany in the 1930s - everyone knows to watch out for it.
That’s not a guarantee for the future. The older I get, the more I think, like other posters said, that progress made are resting “on a razor’s blade”.
Martini Enfield wrote: “Also, things like the premise in THT become implausible because of what happened in Germany in the 1930s - everyone knows to watch out for it.”
One would hope so. But as the horrors pass from living memory and folks find ways to put the old wine into new bottles…
While THT is wildly implausible, given that society is moving in feminism’s direction rather than against it - it is not true that because history has happened, that people will know well enough not to repeat it.
In fact many people are quite comfortable with tyranny, even *keen *on it, as long as it is tyranny against the right people.
That’s true, but still a long way from the religious theocracy police state shown in THT. Everyone has female friends and relatives. It’s pretty hard to “other” an entire half of the population, especially when members of that half are directly responsible for your very existence.
And yet, the Taliban managed to do it - quite successfully - in Afghanistan.
Now, women in Afghanistan were never equal at the level of women in the West, but they were not required to be veiled, they held professional jobs. And then, they were stripped of rights. If their husband’s died, they starved because they couldn’t hold jobs. They were required to be completely covered.
Its also been done very successfully in FDLS communities.
Pssst FLDS…and as a native Utahn you have no idea. Horrible living conditions for the secondary wives, incredible poverty. Don’t let cutsey cable “reality” shows fool you, it’s hell in those communities.
Come on, do you seriously believe that pretty much every man in the USA is willingly going to accede to his own mother, wife, sister, daughter or family members being consigned to the horrors of the system in The Handmaid’s Tale? That’s my point.
Do you think that in all of human history, when women have been oppressed it’s because, somehow, those men didn’t have “female friends and relatives”?
Do you really think it’s “pretty hard to “other” an entire half of the population, especially when members of that half are directly responsible for your very existence”?
Because reality says it doesn’t appear to be hard. Reality says that’s what has been happening for millennia. Every single man on this goddamned planet has a mother. Your claim would make misogyny impossible, and yet, thar she blows.
But it wasn’t your own mother, wife, sister or daughter that you were condemning to becoming sex slaves. It was whores, sluts, harlots, criminals, troublemakers, blasphemers and parasites.
The people in charge didn’t condemn their own family members to become sex slaves, just to second class citizenship. It was other people who became Handmaids.
I mean, we used to have literal slavery in this country. And yes, the slaveowners didn’t accede to their own mothers or wives becoming sex slaves. But…their sisters? Their daughters? If your father had a child with a slave, that slave was your half-sibling. And your property. If you had a child with a slave, that child was your son or daughter. And your property.
Sally Hemings, Thomas Jefferson’s sex slave, was the half-sister of his wife. John Wayles, Sally Hemings’ father, kept her as his slave. True, Thomas Jefferson did free his own children he had with Sally Hemings. So there’s that.
I don’t know if this is covered in the TV series, but in the novel we also learn that the men for whom the handmaids weren’t “others” don’t just gladly hand their womenfolk over to the new regime. Offred’s husband tries to flee with her to Canada, and is presumably killed after they’re captured.
I note that the Handmaid’s Tale system is actually much kinder to the children of handmaids than the American system of slavery was to the children of slaves. They’re regarded as the legitimate children of the couple the handmaid is serving and are thus members of the elite class. Preexisting children of handmaids are adopted by elite families. The children of slave women were slaves, even if they’d been fathered by their mother’s white owner, and if they were lucky enough to be freed then they (and their descendants, for generations) were still considered far from equal to the master’s legitimate children.
It’s not every man in the USA. It’s a small group who seize power in a small area in what used to be the US after the government collapses. And it’s not every woman in that area who is forced to become a Handmaid: just the fertile ones who aren’t related to any of the men who seized power.
It’s not even all of them, it’s only the women considered guilty of some sort of immoral sexual behavior. IIRC the definitions for this are about as flexible as those in power want them to be, but “virtuous” women of the lower classes are not forced to become handmaids. They are forced into arranged marriages if not already married, but even the wives of low-ranking men are considered to be of higher status than handmaids. There’s not much about these “Econowives” in the novel, though.