Yllaria wrote: "You can’t blame her for that. Science Fiction doesn’t pay as well. Speculative Fiction is code for: yes, but I’m still literary. "
You really get into “No true Scotsman” territory pretty quickly when money is involved. I’m sure that more than one reviewer has said about more than one book: "This is good, it can’t be Science Fiction. But it is. As is Carl Sagan’s “Contact”, originally marketed as “Fiction”, much of the early output of Vonnegut, and, oh yeah, you too Harlan Ellison.
The fact it was a hoax doesn’t change the fact HuffingtonPost published it and then initially defended it in the first place, and then crazy partisans on forums actually defended it.
The entire point of my post was to take the most extreme op-ed pieces I’ve seen that people have defended and then make it into an admittedly terrible and farfetched book.
I think you’re dangerously underestimating how much the anti-abortion has achieved. It’s easier for a pregnant woman to get a handgun and shoot herself in the stomach than get a safe abortion in many parts of the country already.
Nothing about THMT implies “overnight” - there is some progression of a war, and global catastrophe leading to contaminated areas and loss of fertility, and a large population drop. The change from women as citizens to women as property happens fairly quickly, but on the heels of other precipitating issues and disasters.
A pandemic in the US would have been handled very differently under the Clinton or Obama administrations than under Bush II or Trump. Postulate a nationwide epidemic with a 20% fatality rate: do you really think this administration wouldn’t frantically make all the hay it could, with the lightly-coerced (more “shepherded”) cooperation of a voting majority?
I’d say their premise wasn’t at all implausible, but these authors almost invariably have the fall caused for the wrong reasons. (Seriously, a Communist Revolution is quite plausible with a widening gap between rich and poor, not because Papa Stalin’s agents tempted Goodboy Jimmy with premarital sex and Pinball machines.)
I think this comment is quite silly and irrelevant.
Our Vice President won’t eat dinner with a woman without a chaperone. Won’t be in a room with a woman who is not his wife. He calls his wife Mother. We have elected officials who quote scripture to justify policy. Atheists are slightly better regarded than Muslim’s in this country.
The Handmaid’s Tale isn’t speculative for them. IMHO it’s how they would like to see this country run.
Yeah. A notable feature of the book is the righteousness those in charge feel about the measures they take to control those humans they consider their inferiors.
Atwood got that tone of complacent self-satisfaction just right. And the same attitude is highly visible in people like Pence and Ted Cruz.
This isn’t infant worship; it’s **fetus **worship. Once the baby is born, does our society care (and put its money where its mouth is) about good health care, child care, education, safety, support of families? Does our society truly value children and families? Nope, once the fetus is born, it and its parents are on their own.
And the irony is that many of the religious so-called pro-lifers (who are really pro-birthers, because they don’t give a rat’s ass about quality of life *after *birth) are also against cheap, readily accessible birth control. :smack: Right. That makes sense.
This is true for minority and non-nuclear families. However, the religious right has shown eager willingness to invest money, time, and rhetoric in support of the Adoption Industry for those they consider the “right” kind of family (i.e., white and nuclear).
No, it is the contention that people who want a certain thing to stop (abortions) and profess to love a thing (life) actively and paradoxicly work against the very thing that has been shown over and over to reduce abortions (sex education and contraception) whilst refusing to take even simple measures (post-natal care) to aid in what they profess to love (again, life)
This would be like be like trying to prevent car accidents by demanding car inspections no longer be required, actively cutting the brakes on certain types of vehicles and placing school playgrounds in the middle of major highways.
I don’t know of many pro-lifers who are anti-birth control, but I’m going to opt out of these political discussions until the threads get moved to GD. Things are getting awfully heated for CS.
Can you recommend some books in this category? I would like to read one and see what I think. I can’t think of any books about extra-left dystopias. Does Animal Farm count in this category?
Of course, that’s kind of what’s unrealistic about it.
The United States turning into Gilead, as described in the book, is roughly as likely as me turning into Viola Davis. The problem Atwood kind of gives herself in describing the events that turn the USA into Gilead is that she wants to do three things in her narrative:
She wants a totalitarian state as described in the book,
Which replaces the United States, which makes it dramatically shocking but explains why everyone speaks English and whatnot, and which
Happens with such speed that the protagnoist, Offred, has lived, as an adult, in the USA/Gilead pre and post transition.
The result is a transition that is ludicrous in scope and speed. Certainly a country could change that dramatically, but not that fast. It could change that fast, but not that dramatically.