>girl I'm into tells me she's been watching Handmaid's

>>84349669
I also havnt watched the show, but do know that Margaret atwood makes scfi nerds spaz out.

>>84349669
>find the premise so incredibly laughable that I immediately dissect it and point out how absurd it is
I'm sure that you can do that with any story presented to you
>come up with a much better take on the idea and explain it over the next 10 minutes
Perhaps you should let someone other then yourself be the judge of that

So explain your idea

>>84349669
You're a fucking idiot, m8, fair play

>>84349669
How is the premise laughable? Is it really unthinkable that a brutal theocracy could overthrow the government and implement a nightmarish reality for females?

The type of thing that happens in most places on planet earth, as we live and breathe, today?

>>84350063
Sure troll sure

>>84350083
Oh, I see.

Remake this thread on your containment board, you'll have a lot more success with an echo chamber as opposed to anyone who challenges you at all.

>>84350063
>modern Christianity
>ever becoming a brutal theocracy again
>ever overthrowing a gov't
>brutal theocracy
>nightmarish reality ONLY for women
>all men are totally fine and live great lives
fucking kek

>>84350110
>assuming anyone who disagrees with you is the same person
OP here, >>84350083 isn't me
as expected from someone dumb enough to not see how dumb the concept is in this day and age

>>84350063
It's fairly unthinkable for the US to adopt Sharia law overnight, yes. The entire thing disregards everything about western culture to make a cheap point about patriarchy.

And besides, the middle East isn't "most places".

File: 1393825503904.png (269KB, 538x538px) Image search: [Google]

269KB, 538x538px

>>84350140
>>84350143
>a hypothetical situation could never happen because I say so

>>84350180
>ask a question
>get answer
>NUH UH
Fuck off

>>84350180
Please provide an argument as to why it's feasible. Because the show sure fails to do so.

>>84350180
The premise isn't even a good hypothetical, it's incredibly dumb and basically requires you to turn your brain off
>hurr this one couple somehow convinced the government that this was the way to go

>>84350143
This. The story is deliberately crippled for the sake of "sticking it to the patriarchy/Christianity"

One of the first things I said while I was dissecting the premise to my friend was that the religion sounded awfully like Islam and not Christianity, and that going with Islam would have been an immensely more interesting/realistic/unique premise.

>>84350231
But Anon, you can't critizise Islam. That would be racist.

File: Adolf Hitler.jpg (32KB, 341x450px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 341x450px

>>84350228
>please provide an argument as to why this situation that has become reality countless times in real life can also happen in a fictional world, because it just can't, because like, we're more better advanced and have better morals or something lol idk

>>84350231
>individual people can't be charismatic and convincing enough to affect the change they want in society

oh...

>>84349669
>Fuck this show and fuck the cunt who wrote the book.
That's right lad, lets not be even remotely introspective and think of your issues, lets blame everyone else. That's healthy.

I'm sure on your next "kekistan" march you'll be at the front.

>>84350295
well new record for godwin's law

but that doesn't make you right

>Christianity
>Dissociating procreation from marriage

Yeah it's shit. Show is typical SJW mediocrity with no artistic integrity at all. It's ininteresting, dull, not well written. It's just shit.

>>84350295
>countless times
That's funny, I cannot seem to recall any instance where a modern western nation adopted Sharia law.

>>84350369
>I cannot seem to recall any instance where a modern western nation adopted Sharia law.
give the EU a decade or two

>>84349669
>>she leaves to eat dinner and says we'll talk tomorrow
meanwhile she's fucking Chad and your opinion on this show never changed anything

>>84349876
I'm not even a scifi nerd, to be honest.
But yeah, it made me spaz out because it just seemed like the lifetime movie version of a dystopia.

>>84349954
I can suspend a certain level of disbelief but just hearing the series explained to me utterly destroyed it. It's garbage.

My idea was given an infertility crisis (seemingly affecting both genders), most fertile men would be high class with their own harem (replacing the women as the series currently does, once they are proven to be infertile/too old to bear healthy children). It's stupid to think such a dystopia would respect "monogamy" in any way shape or form when it's inherently anti-productive in regards to breeding.

And if you wanted to make this about a theocratical government (I think religion would fall by the wayside in a more primitive society such as this, but it's a direction you can take to make the story more interesting), guess which religion condones harems (and multiple brides if you want to make the harems more religion-friendly) and is shit to women? Islam. It's a perfect religion for this sort of crisis.

So you could keep your whole narrative about oppressed women but then you could also have infertile men being regarded as inferior/lower class and have them serve as the cogs as society (also realistic) and have stories about their suffering like the women do. You could do cool things like have a handmaid find out that one of the high class dudes is infertile and covering it up (in order to keep his status) or the struggle of a fag who's fertile. Lots of possibilities that are of course not being explored because MUH PATRIARCHY.

>>84350028
I won't deny I'm a fucking idiot, but what a clever and productive retort you made.

File: 3kL3N1x.png (603KB, 630x630px) Image search: [Google]

603KB, 630x630px

>>84350387
>slippery slope

>>84350063
>Is it really unthinkable that a brutal theocracy could overthrow the government and implement a nightmarish reality for females?
It's unthinkable for anywhere that's not 3rd world and not islamic

File: argument for ants.png (27KB, 165x115px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 165x115px

>>84350344
>I have no argument or reply at all: the post

>>84350369
>something can't happen because it hasn't happened

>>84350330
>not realizing he was being intentionally flippant

>>84350439
>AYO WE WUZ GOOD CHRISTIAN BOYS WE NEVER WUZ PERSECUTIN NOBODY JUS TRYINA HEAD TO CHURCH ON SUNDAY GET MO MONEY FO DEM PROGRAMS WE ALWAYS TREATED WOMEN PERFECT

>>84350398
She actually called me back after about 20 minutes. I guess Chad's a premature ejaculator.

>>84350437
slippery slop is only a fallacy if the mechanism is disprovable.

have fun trying to disprove birth rates and demographics you anti science drumfptkin

File: 1498143663696.jpg (10KB, 240x250px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 240x250px

>>84350437
>Just ignore it and it'll go away

>>84350447
brainlets who immediate goes muh Hitler can't comprehend an argument

File: 1494239598069.jpg (94KB, 932x631px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 932x631px

>>84350481

>>84350492
>She actually called me back
>this thread was made out of frustration

It's ok man we're here for you

>>84350541
I'm a decent multitasker. She's playing an MMO anyway.

>>84350481
>whataboutism
i want the russians to leave

>>84350536
>MUH MUH HITLER ARGUMENT

Nah, it was 100% completely valid. You're saying that 1-2 individuals can't change a society and I provided proof that you can. BTFO.

>>84350569
doubling down on being wrong just makes you twice as wrong brainlet

>>84350560
lol more greentext story m8

>>84350437
>sharia courts in the UK
>private sharia law in Germany
>millions of islamic migrants still immigrating
>situation has happened before in several asian countries
>'slippery slope'
clearly you have no understanding of what constitutes a slippery slope fallacy

>>84349876
This is very true. Margaret Atwood is a disgustingly pretentious person who doesn't even have the grace to acknowledge the genre that made her. She acts like she's above words like 'dystopia' and 'science-fiction' because she wants to be taken seriously by high school English teachers more than anything in the world. Katherine Burdekin shit bigger than The Handmaiden's Tale. Even if her work wasn't so boring and stupid I'd still dislike her just for how she acts.

File: 1360353638221.png (11KB, 211x246px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 211x246px

>>84350580
>merely pointing out that I brought up Hitler means I'm wrong for some reason (???? no explanation lol)

Karl Marx.
Jesus Christ.
Adolf Hitler.

Individuals that dramatically shifted the society they lived in by being charismatic and convincing.

>b-but you brought up Hitler le Godwin's law that means you're wrong somehow!!

>>84350398
kek this

>>84350369
>That's funny, I cannot seem to recall any instance where a modern western nation adopted Sharia law.
the uk has sharia courts

>>84349669

Let her know in no uncertain terms that she only has one chance left with you and once chance left to save herself, and it all depends on her renouncing this stupid show and everything similar that's been done to brainwash her

Yeah, big repressive danger for women now due to CHRISTIANITY yeah that's the religion they need to worry about

>>84350642
They just do that because Angloid judges can't be fucked wasting their valuable time settling domestic disputes between cousin-fuckers who don't speak English. Serious cases which actual demand the state's attention never get taken to meme-courts.

>>84350569
In the 1930s, fascism wasn't exactly unheard of in European countries, and Nazism was a result of decades of a changing political landscape. There exists no similar precedent for introducing a Sharia state in modern western countries.

>>84350666
[citation needed]

File: alex.png (335KB, 600x547px) Image search: [Google]

335KB, 600x547px

>>84350666
>defending sharia courts
>666

File: 1384307939273.jpg (125KB, 380x391px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 380x391px

>>84350671
>There has to be a precedent in order for something to happen
>nothing ever happens for the first time

>>84350587
Sure.
I am now going to play the MMO with her.
I'll check back on this thread later.
You're not wrong that I made it to vent and it was largely effective in that regard, and clearly I didn't completely blow it so everything's cool.

>>84350411
While your idea of making infertility show up on both sides would make the series more interesting, anyone who isn't on 4chan would immediately shut you down as soon as you said Islam. Regardless of how well it fits the apocalypse, feminists (aka the core audience) wouldn't appreciate any "negative representation".
If you wanna work the polygamous angle, you'd probably would have to go with a branch of Christianity, like Mormonism.
>So you could keep your whole narrative about oppressed women but then you could also have infertile men being regarded as inferior/lower class and have them serve as the cogs as society (also realistic) and have stories about their suffering like the women do.
I have a vague feeling that if you brought this up to someone who watches the show, they'd immediately say that the point of the show is to highlight WOMEN'S suffering, not men's. Ladies don't typically like to share the spotlight.

>>84350706
Yes, I'm an idiot for implying that causality exists.

>>84350657
Christianity is a very serious threat to the liberty of women. Christian's have been standing in the way of the American woman's right to slaughter her sons and daughters because she can't be fucked raising them for far too long. It's touching that this show about a woman grieving over the loss of her child is uniting so many women on the issue of abortion.

god, if you lurk /tv/, I think we're about due for a second deluge. The faithful won't hold it against you and the unfaithful have it coming.

>>84350697
>>84350703
Australia has abo courts, I figure it's the same logic. Magistrates can't be fucked dealing with a thousand petrol-sniffing abos bashing their wives and generally being public nuisances every week so they get a little side-room at the court house where they get to informally arbitrate with their local elder petrol-sniffer and reach a conclusion that's much cheaper and more cost-effective for the state.

I do seem to get 666s more often than is statistically likely though I will admit, and usually when I'm defending something odd or taboo too.

>>84350714
I'm glad at least someone liked my ideas. At least it seems you did, and your points are more about its viability, which while fair and accurate, are not shit I'm concerned with. Only concerned about a better story, which I think is what my revision of the base premise guarantees.

File: 28361231236.png (15KB, 528x434px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 528x434px

>>84350727
>Now we're just throwing out big boy words with no understand of their meaning in an attempt to sound all smart-like

>>84350411
>You could do cool things like have a handmaid find out that one of the high class dudes is infertile and covering it up
that's exaclty what happens in the story, just watch it before arguing that you could do better, jesus you truly are an obnoxious autist

>find the premise so incredibly laughable that I immediately dissect it and point out how absurd it is

the plot of this show is like every 20th post on /r9k/, doesn't sound absurd at all

>>84349669
Can someone explain what the problem is? I just read the Wikipedia page for the book

Is the problem that there isn't a reasonable explanation for how it developed?
In which case, yeah it might be bad sci-fi, it wouldn't stop it from a being a good book/story with valid themes/ideas (it could also be shit, I haven't read it but I generally like Atwood)
It probably just asks you to suspend your disbelief for how it happens, like a lot of writers do who don't care about the hard sci-fi aspect
Would you have preferred it if it happened on a planet far far away in a different time period?

Is the problem that you don't believe that Christianity can become similar to the way it describes?
Cause that's a fucking stupid point when Puritan christians literally did that in North America and England, Catholicism was used in that way in Italy, Spain and France etc.

Is your main problem that it attacks a part of Christianity rather than a part of Islam?
Why the fuck would Margaret Atwood have written about that in 1985, she doesn't come from a Muslim background but a WASP background, of course she's going to write about what she knows about

I'm not saying it's good, but you guys haven't really provided any sound points for why it's bad

>>84350840
The problem is OP somehow wandered away from /r9k/ and/or /pol/ and even more so thought people in real life would sympathize or agree with him, much less a female.

i.e. actual autism

>>84350840
It's based on the iranian revolution and is for some reason transposed onto western christianity.

File: 12937123716211.png (403KB, 331x448px) Image search: [Google]

403KB, 331x448px

>there are literal christcucks posting in this thread RIGHT NOW

>>84350778
>fukkin liberals an thur 5 dollah wurds
sweetie...

>>84350905
Once again, its not like Christianity hasn't shat on women and also even if it's based off the Iranian revolution, Margaret Atwood would still have no fucking clue about Islam so chose to write about something she does somewhat know about, like growing up as a woman in a country founded by protestants

Also look at it this way, maybe she was hoping that by transposing a story similar to the Iranian revolution to a familiar American/Western context with the Western equivalent i.e. Christianity, she could shed light on what the issues were abroad for local readers to inspire research and action

>>84350826
Elliot Roger's hypothetical dystopia was completely different. It was secular, concentration camp-based and asexual, for the purpose of conserving mana and supremity.

>>84350840
The problem is that Atwood transplanted the Iranian Revolution onto the US. A reasonable person would just think 'okay she's taking a somewhat absurd stretch to get our almonds activating' but now people are acting like there's any kind of basis in reality here. Atwood isn't even American, this story wasn't built on cultural analysis and insight, it was built on feminist hysteria and her weird Canadian cultural superiority thing.

The show doesn't seem to want you to suspend disbelief, if anything it's encouraging you """think""" about how totally grounded and relevant this struggle is. I personally would have greatly preferred a faraway planet. Making the revolutionaries Christians just seems mean, stupid and spiteful.

>attacks a part of Christianity
For it to be a relevant or even not completely ridiculous look at Christianity it would have to actually deal with something which IS a part of Christianity. Not WAS. And even then, only WAS if you stretch definitions to hell and back. Italy and Spain in the 20th century only ever really told women to keep doing what they were already doing, and only Spain justified their actions with Catholicism. Francoist Spain is the closest thing to Handmaiden's Tale in living memory and there's almost no resemblance between them at all.

The Handmaiden's Tale isn't an insightful look at Christianity in America, she didn't consider the nuances of American culture at all in constructing her hypothetical revolutionary dystopia, the selection of America and Christianity feel almost totally arbitrary. I'm honestly as bothered that she chose the United States as I am Christianity, her arrogant slandering of both disgusts me.

Katherine Burdekin is the only good womeme dystopic fiction writer. Seriously 'Swastika Night' is better than Orwell.

>hahaha none of this would happen to women

the stuff that happens to the girls in the show have happened in real life

>>84350140
Yeah in this day and age its pretty dumb but you have to remeber this was written when both Regan and Thatcher were in power, when bible thumping had reached a hight and when feminists started to fracture and many anti sex feminists gained traction

>>84351056
>>hahaha none of this would happen to women
no shit it would look at any non western country

>>84351040
>The problem is that Atwood transplanted the Iranian Revolution onto the US.

The Iranian revolution ended up improving the lot of women in Iran in the long run, Ironically,

>>84350991
>chose to write about something she does somewhat know about, like growing up as a woman in a country founded by protestants
She didn't write about growing up Protestant, she wrote about being hold hostage and raped by an insane psuedo-Christian dystopia. The comparison is not only ridiculous but also makes the whole novel seem pointless. If she didn't understand Islam at all why write about the Iranian Revolution? Because that's obviously what she was writing about. And she did seem to understand at least a bit of what happened over there. It's a story about having your place in the world completely pulled out from under your feet and reduced to second-class citizen status overnight. This goes back to why I said I'd prefer the story being on another planet with a made up faith. Nothing about the heart of the story is inherently Christian or American. It's purely a feminist parable.

And she didn't have a regular protestant upbringing. She was raised by a Euphoric entomologist travelling around the countryside. The protagonist of Cat's Eye is at least partially based on her.

>>84350231
>and that going with Islam would have been an immensely more interesting/realistic/unique premise.
It was obviously meant to be Islam, but I guess she didn't want a fatwa against her. Didn't she write it in the aftermath of the Iranian revolution?

>>84351106
I think that that's just something that happened alongside the revolution rather than a consequence of it wouldn't you say? I've never studied the country in any kind of depth but wouldn't that just come down to general modernization which would have happened regardless of politics?

>>84350743
they are literally nothing alike. the abo courts are dealt with in isolated communities that operate autonomously and the people are 'the rightful owners of the land'. the sharia courts were a capitulation to the demands of the muslim community that believe that they should be subject to sharia law over the law of the land. they don't just deal with small disputes, they give out advice according to the quran which often means muslims do something illegal like fgm but going unpunished due to islamic doctrine saying it's ok. i also like how your citation is just 'well i figure that it's just them being efficient and not capitulating'

>>84351056
Yes, it's in fact currently happening. In the middle east. Which has an entirely different culture, history and religion than the US.

>>84351175
>fgm
What's that? Something serious? And I don't have a citation but it just seems like an extremely obvious answer if England's courts are anything like Australia's. What's the most serious issue that's ever been dealt with in an Islamic court and what's the most serious that's involved a non-Muslim? The day that England let's an Angloid get screwed over by a foreign legal system within England is when they're truly doomed.

>But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

Does it not say this in the Bible and do you Christcucks in this thread toss away this verse or what? Does this Biblical verse at the very least seem to imply that women are below men? Let's see how many of you can be intellectually honest about what your fairy tale book actually says about the world.

>>84350492
>She actually called me back
sure bud

>>84351226
Female genital mutilation

>>84351108
Ok its clear now that youre rather too stupid or too blinded by /pol/ shit to get the point of the book she isnt trying to say this could happen in the US its what if it happened to also make it more relateable to a western audience she used christianity theres no need to get so fucking defensive about a book that was written well before you were born you arent under some sort of percecution

I bet your "dissection" consisted of calling it a feminist show (it isn't) and saying it would make more sense for it to be an Islamic theocracy in an Arab country (retarded point, but everyone here keeps making it).

>>84351226
female genital mutilation. they don't deal with non-muslims (yet) and the most serious thing they're supposed to deal with is custody battles, which generally results in the man getting full custody because muh women aren't equal to men. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-22044724

The show is shit, but the book and movie are good. In fact, the show shits on a lot of the themes and ideas of the book/movie just to be "current" and "relevant."

It's also very episodic in it's format. It's the same story continuing every episode, but each episode has the exact same structure with ne deviation. *This* happens at the 15 minute mark, *That* happens at the 30 minute mark, etc.

>>84351296
Jeezaloo. I think that that says a lot about what England thinks of immigrants. If that goes they're effectively in their own country, but residing in England.

>>84351364
This system really begs the question of why these people are in England.

>>84351306
I didn't say that she intended to make Christianity and the United States look bad. She didn't have to intend to to make it so, and I shouldn't have to argue that she did. Have you looked at the book's Goodreads page? I can't blame you if you haven't because that site is awful but there's evidence all around that her book painted how a lot of people think of American and Christian culture. Her choice of setting was at best irresponsible, and yes I am a giant cuck who believes in limited censorship to serve social ends.

If anybody here is blinded by ideology it's you. Look at how hostile you're getting. I got my point across without any 'fuck's or accusations directed at you personally.

>>84350411
>seemingly affecting both genders
>BUT WHAT ABOUT US WHITE MALES? WHY ISN'T ANYONE TALKING ABOUT US WHITE MALES, I NEED CONSTANT ATTENTION PLS

you're a certified autist

>>84351393
Holy shit. You... I...

You know what? I'm out of this thread. I hope I never meet you in another thread for as long as I live.

Btw, I'm not even the guy you were arguing with, just a lurker.

>>84351132
I not much of an expert either, but I'd say ypu're right. People form all walks of life hated the Shah's guts from islamist clerics to marxist intellectuals, the islamis faction just had the most clout and was able to cosloidate power more effectively. In fact I'd say that the conucil of clerics that forms a sort of legislatve bnanch of the Iranian goverment and contorlls what political parites are able to run for election is far more consrevative than the general iranian public, and Iran would be a more liberal soiety if they didn't restrict the more leftist and liberal political parties for running.

My main point is that it just make Atwood look ignorant about Iran, as well as america. She reduced it to a purely islamist movement with a full on theocratic state, which is an oversimplification.

>>84351432
The ellipses is the fedora of punctuation.

>>84350560
>>84350709
>MMO
>confirmed for having few other beta orbiters

dude that sounds really sad
if you must orbit someone shouldn't you at least pick a 6/10

>>84350411
>It's stupid to think such a dystopia would respect "monogamy" in any way shape or form when it's inherently anti-productive in regards to breeding.
Not when religion is added to the mix, you know virgin Mary and all that.

>>84351393
If this is hostile reddit is more your speed

>>84351474
at least you didn't make a food analogy

>>84351040
>Atwood transplanted the Iranian Revolution onto the US
In interviews, she mentions other countries that influenced the book - not just the Iranian Revolution.

>now people are acting like there's any kind of basis in reality here
The book was written during the emergence of the new Christian Right. Sure, maybe they weren't going to perform a coup, but they still had immense lobbying power. There are many schools in the US that, to date, don't teach evolution at all and teach abstinence-based sexual education.

>it was built on feminist hysteria and her weird Canadian cultural superiority thing.
She's mentioned before, it's not a feminist novel. It takes place from the perspective of a woman in an oppressive society, yes, but the men are equally restrained.

>For it to be a relevant or even not completely ridiculous look at Christianity it would have to actually deal with something which IS a part of Christianity
>The Handmaiden's Tale isn't an insightful look at Christianity in America
Have you possibly considered the book and the show aren't attacking Christianity, they're attacking religious fundamentalism and extremism as a whole? Tell me how many times Jesus is mentioned? What about Moses? These are central figures in the Christian canon and they're routinely ignored. How many times do they even visit a church? (Once by my count and it's filled with executed civilians).

The Iranian Revolution influencing her is important. If she was so bothered by that, why do you think she would suddenly switch track and write about Christianity instead? The use of the United States is to drive the point home, she's bringing the concept of a theocratic coup to people's personal lives in a way that's clearly very uncomfortable. It's easy to look at what happens in Iran and write it off, so in some ways, if you're this riled up about her book/show she's already succeeded.

>>84351040
It literally is a totally grounded and relevant struggle for women all across the globe and has been a struggle for women pretty much everywhere up until less than a hundred years ago

Once again, think about it this way. If she writes directly about Islam she's
1. being disingenuous by writing about a culture she doesn't know. Imagine if a middle eastern writer chose to write a book from the perspective of an American. You'd say "hey, this is fucking bullshit he doesn't understand the culture at all"
2. she's writing for a Western audience, she wants Western readers to read this and think "Wow, this is really shitty. Oh what? this happens in tonnes of other places? Wow we should really do something about that". If she writes from the perspective of a Muslim woman or a woman from another planet, most Western readers won't be able to relate because it's a completely different world. If it is set in a culture that they can relate with, even if only partially more than a foreign one, they can put themselves in the shoes of someone else

Stop looking at it as an attack on your ideals (unless you're a huge fucking cunt that wants a society like the one depicted) and start looking at it as a what-if.

Also get off your is/was bullshit and go to South America where some shit has literally never changed. It's not crazy to think that someone could inspire a huge group of people that they have to go back to the 'true form of Christianity' as it is actually written in scripture

>>84349669
>Fuck this show and fuck the cunt who wrote the book.
Tell the girl it is based around what happened to women in Iran after the revolution and that Trump's Muslim ban has effectively stopped those men from coming to America.
Should be worth a giggle.

who's idea is that a sci-fi setting has to be perfectly feasible to be interesting? you're all just butthurt it alludes to christianity rather than islam?

>>84351393
>I am a giant cuck who believes in limited censorship to serve social ends.

Go back to your fucking hugbox you absolute moron. That you could hold values so antithetical to the western enlightenment both disturbs and amuses me. You fucks are truly lost. I hope the muzzies rape your family m8

>>84351108
She's not saying that this is what it is like growing up in a protestant country, she's asking 'What would it be like if someone chose to concentrate on specific parts of the Christian religion (that exist in scripture but not in practice, at least in the west) and then took over the country and forced everyone into it?' and then tells you 'Hey, this is a reality for tonnes of women in extremist Islam/fanatical Christianity in parts of South America or the Philippines or Africa/tribal religions in Africa etc.'

And why write about the Iranian Revolution as a female and a feminist while it is happening?
Gee, I don't fucking know, maybe because it's related to her lifelong passion for the emancipation of women from all forms of patriarchal oppression and the search for gender equality

Also what's wrong with it being a feminist parable (which it sort of is)?
It seems to me perfectly acceptable to ask people to think about what their culture is founded on (Puritanism) and reflect on it.

>>84351565
That's the thing, it BARELY fucking alludes to Christianity.

There are no crucifixes, there's no Jesus, no Moses, and a 15-second scene in a church.

>>84351547
>be from shit country and dream to escape to freedom in america/canada/europe/whatever
>finally pull it of
>assholes that kept you down follow you
>they try to pass laws like the ones you just escaped from
>some of those countries are considering making these shit laws legal

>>84351600
I think you're being too forgiving with the people you're arguing with. Definitely crediting them with more intelligence than they display.

They are literally just going REEE don't say my religion is bad / I don't like SJW's or Feminists and those 2 groups like this show so I can't like it.

File: 1219436952593.jpg (28KB, 356x355px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 356x355px

>>84350411

Congratulations on pointing out the obvious fuckface.

If you had been more educated on the topic, you'd realize that Handmaid's Tale was simply a parable to the Iran Degeneration in 1979 where they went from being a secular US puppet state to an Islamic shithole that they are still today.

Atwood wanted to draw a parallel of something similar happening to white people. Everyone knows Islam is a bag of dicks, and no one is arguing anything else. The fact that Christianity is the same shitfuckery under proper conditions was the highlight here.

Since you're so interested in logic, why don't you explain to me the real-world implications of the majority of the world still adhering to inane illogical religions in 2017, with all the evidence to the contrary laid out by scientific advancement specifically in the Post WW2 period.

>>84351617
Which countries have considered making Islamic laws legal?

File: fedora squad.jpg (48KB, 599x360px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 599x360px

>>84349669
F-F-F-F-F-F-F-F-F-F

>>84351498
Religion and revolution are too nuanced subjects for generalizations to lead to any good. Every revolution is driven by countless idiosyncratic factors, all her book is good for is bringing up the general idea of a 'theocratic coup' as you said. But for it to hold any kind of relevance it would have to intricately deal with the specific substance of one religion and society or another. As it is it's only good as a wild hypothetical scenario, you could replace the ""American Christians"" in The Handmaiden's Tale with sea-monsters and you wouldn't really lose any depth since their actions are just as grounded in reality. I understand that by using symbols people recognize she was able to drive the issue home but that ties back to >>84351393. It was an irresponsible use of symbols that got lots of impressionable people worked up into hysterics over nothing and afraid of people who would never dream of what Atwood proposes. I know she doesn't believe that, she's not an idiot, but her choice to use them seems very unfair to me.
>if you're this riled up about her book/show she's already succeeded.
Succeeded at what specifically? This story can't stir up any profound or useful thinking. It's too absurdly general. Just reading about the Spanish Civil War or the French Revolution can do so much more, but that doesn't have spicy sex-scenes to titillate plebs so nobody will ever touch those books again.

>>84351524
I appreciate that she had the taste not to write from the POV of a foreign culture in Iran, but at the same time she did do that, she wrote about America while being Canadian. America's history with Christianity is long and intricate and I don't think that she gave the subject the respect it deserved. And I can appreciate her trying to raise awareness for what it's like to have society pull a 180 against you overnight, but if this was her aim I think she failed by not dealing with the subject sensibly and instead dealing in exaggeration and pure fiction.

>>84349669
>gf brings up Get Out, says it was really good
>I shrug, say I haven't played that game
>"It's not a game, anon. it's a horror movie, the best I've ever seen. It brings up important social issues"
>Like what?
>"Blah blah black people"
>Ask her to spoil it for me (I knew the premise already, I just like making people explain things)
>She does, I laugh, ask if she's sure it's not a comedy, point out how ridiculous the plot is
>she stops bringing it up.

>>84351651
I was going to call him a fucking idiot but deleted it because I knew he'd sperg out over an ad hominem and just dismiss the entire thing

I've never watched the show, have no idea if it's good, but the book is fairly sound

>>84351654
Some countries like Canada nad France have had earings about it. It's not so much that there was a chance of them passing, it was that such clearly illegal law for these countires even had an earing that bothers me.

>>84350063
>The type of thing that happens in most places on planet earth, as we live and breathe, today?

So why write a Handmaid's Take with a Christian Theocracy? An Islamic country would make more sense.

>>84351691
>I've never read the Bible, gone to church/Sunday School or studied at a Christian private school
If you actually knew anything about Christianity and the way it has shaped countries and their view on women you'd realize that "American Christians" is completely a propos
>>84351747
Nigger read the fucking thread

>>84351747

Why not write it with a Christian Theocracy? I'm pretty sure she wasn't taking into account your personal feelings, christcuck. According to CBSNews, 8 in 10 Americans believe that angels are literally real. A similar number believe Noah's Flood actually happened, literally.

>oh, but they couldn't possibly be mislead or pushed into accepting ridiculous societal standards for women that existed at all times in human history except the last 60 years or so

>>84351595
If Oliver Stone wasn't able to release his disgusting piece of shit 'Natural Born Killers' how many people would still be alive right now? If that animated offal 'Sausage Party' were nuked how many man-hours and brain-cells would be saved? I think that art should have a general cultural aim. Think of what you want to encourage in your country and have your art aspire to that. If you don't hold your artists to some kind of standard you end up with a race to the bottom to appease the lowest common denominator. When freedom can be equated with Transformers 5 I think it's time to re-evaluate our cultural priorities.

>>84351600
I feel like I'm doing an abysmal job getting my points across but at the same time you guys aren't exactly A+ English students.

>She's not saying that this is what it is like growing up in a protestant country
Did the first line of my post being
>She didn't write about growing up Protestant
Not clue you in that maybe I understand this point? I know that it's not a deliberate condemnation of Christianity. At this point I'm convinced that I could livestream myself tattooing this point into my chest and you people still wouldn't process where I stand. It's a story about society suddenly changing and leaving you in a shit position.

>what's wrong with it being a feminist parable?
WHERE DID I SAY THAT'S A PROBLEM? NOBODY HERE UNDERSTANDS AND I'M LOSING PATIENCE.
>It seems to me perfectly acceptable to ask people to think about what their culture is founded on (Puritanism) and reflect on it.
Is it a book about puritan colonialism or a book about a hypothetical violent social revolution? Because these things aren't the same.

>>84351651
>>84351725
I think that you've spent too much time arguing with false-/pol/ (you)-fishers and convinced yourselves you're intelligent.

>>84351815
If it's that simple explain it to me.

File: 2017-06-27 08.21.02.jpg (104KB, 759x462px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 759x462px

>>84349669

File: 1459347075915.jpg (111KB, 540x540px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 540x540px

>>84351919
>t-they are just trolling for (You)'s!!
>haha you fell for it I'm smarter than you

>>84351691
>Religion and revolution are too nuanced subjects for generalizations to lead to any good.
I read this a few times and I really can't seem to agree. It sounds nonsensical to complain that her book didn't examine the nuances of religion and revolution, when it's intentionally trying to draw a comparison between Iran and the West, parts of Africa and the West, the Philippines, etc. by keeping it vague. In fact, I would say focusing too much on just how the revolution happened and the mechanics of the whole thing would draw attention away from what's important.

>But for it to hold any kind of relevance it would have to intricately deal with the specific substance of one religion and society or another.
No, that's the great part about it! In the show, you can see in the scenes with the driver and the senior religious officials discussing the problem with fertility in their country. You witness the moment where they concoct their new society where a handful of women are used for breeding, when one of them mentions how they could find scripture to support it. That scene shows how they're distorting Christianity for their own goals, the same way many Islamic extremists do today. It's not about Christianity, you have to separate your thinking from that. The author wanted to write about a Western country, so why not the US? It's the biggest one after all. And which religion is by far the most dominant in the US? Well of course it's Christianity.

Showing the way religious extremists distort the message of their faith is timeless and relevant to Islam, Christianity, Judaism, and everything else.

>It was an irresponsible use of symbols that got lots of impressionable people worked up
How so? If she decided to write about a theocratic dictatorship in the Western world, then Christian America would make the most sense.

>>84351935
Hello? The Jerk Store? I'd like to order 50 KYLOs of POTTERY.

>>84351654
huge percentages of muslim immigrants in germany, france, sweden and uk all are actively demanding sharia law to be made state law and are even already living by it in certain no go areas.

t. european

>>84351747
Writings about the bad parts of a religion is really important for the way in which we as a society choose to interpret the religious ideas.
It's thanks to people's writing that we now have the relatively acceptable (compared to the past, other places, and the actual texts) form of Christian practice we have now
Margaret Atwood in this sense would be too late, but it is still worth mentioning

Since the Bible is considered 'holy' we haven't removed parts of the Bible that don't conform with current ideas and practices
It doesn't seem like a long shot (especially since it happens in cults) that someone would choose to focus on the parts of the Bible that are incredibly shitty (see WBC)

We really need another real reformation of Christianity that matches modern ideas where we remove parts of the Bible that simply don't make sense anymore

>>84351919
>if that animated offal 'Sausage Party' were nuked how many man-hours and brain-cells would be saved?

You're here posting on 4chan. Don't claim that you value brain cells and spending time productively.

>>84351919
Whoa whoa buddy, calm down

So what is your point? Write that down really fucking clearly, and really fucking succinctly

>>84351403
not him. I have heard that counter allowed which always left me wondering. I have never heard anybody talking exclusively about problems affecting men in any media. I certainly know about a docent shows that are just about how much "wymen are opressed" but none for men.
name me a single show or politician that has exclusively talked in length about male suffering?

>>84351919
>I think that art should have a general cultural aim.
No, you want art to adhere to your personal taste and politics.

>>84351976
Except it's not a huge amount, it's a few people who want ALL muslim people to live the same everywhere being very loud about it and normie muslims who wanted to be free being too scared of them to oppose them because they know the consequences.

Same thing is happening here in Canada. These guys are union-tier evil and use bullying (real physical bullying, not just calling people name) to make the muslims fall in line. They threaten the wives and kids of male muslims to force them to be part of their Sharia-wanting crowd.

I know a few muslims guys who are going through this right now. It's fucking disgusting and the world is so PC that they can't even get proper police help against these cucksuckers because that would be racist, I kid you not.

>>84351954
Everyone ITT has the reading comprehension of an 8 year old. This thread doesn't have the trolls, I'm saying that their attitudes towards this stuff seems to have been shaped by arguing with retards holding /pol/-esque views. Since the election everyone expressing an opinion to the right of Pol Pot gets attacked by at least one euphoric centrist who sees infograph-wielding Kekistani citizens behind every post.

>>84351964
>intentionally trying to draw a comparison between Iran and the West, parts of Africa and the West, the Philippines, etc. by keeping it vague.
I understand that the comparisons would disentegrate if she tried to get specific and that's why she didn't. But that's my problem, the situations can't really be compared because Iran, the United States, Africa and The Philippines aren't comparable. Revolutions are incredibly complex events. Not wanting to go in-depth on the issue is fine, I can completely understand a writer wanting to avoid that headache, but that's why I think she should have set it in space. If she's not going to create a realistic foundation for her revolution she might as well go all the way and completely divorce it from reality. As it is too many awkward half-comparisons exist which muddle the story. And I think that this thread is more than enough proof that it certainly is muddling.
>great part about it
I can imagine revolutionaries with their aim turning to religion to justify their actions no problem, but I can't imagine American revolutionaries using Chrsitianity to justify these particular actions. It's too far divorced from reality to work. Should have used a space-religion with vaguely Abrahamic themes. Then we can fill in the gaps ourselves and make it work. IRL the gaps are already filled and if you know the stuff it doesn't work out.

And she could have written about a theocratic dictatorship in a western style setting by making up a new country. The US and Christianity are too personal.

>>84349669
a show watched by a woman who would probably get upset
about mansplaining gets the show mansplained
to her
boy you are stupid

>>84352149
>I can't imagine American revolutionaries using Chrsitianity to justify these particular actions.

Nobody cares what you can imagine.

>it can't happen because I say so
>Christianity is a good religion we dindu nuffin
>we are so much better and more morally advanced than brown people who believe equally retarded shit based off a 2000 year old collection of books written by people hundreds of years removed from the events they write about

>>84352149
>The US and Christianity are too personal
It would seem to me that they are exactly personal enough for people from the US (or Canada, I mean most of the population live in parts that are essentially the same culturally like Toronto or Vancouver) and/or Christians to relate to the characters. Part of the book focuses on the female character pre-revolution so that female Western readers can be like "damn bro, that's literally me, I can know empathize with the character"

>>84350110
>tfw I'll never be this ass decimated by a separate board on a Congolese knock off NHL jersey warehouse website

>>84352046
>Don't claim that you value brain cells and spending time productively.
I don't value my time or aesthetics at all. I've seen Miami Vice three times. Sausage Party was just that bad that even a cave-dwelling troglodyte like myself walked out in disgust.

>>84352055
>what is your point
Succinctly, revolutions are an extremely complicated matter and what happened in Iran and other nations were extremely intricate affairs made possible by the idiosyncrasies of each time and place. By choosing to deal with these events painting in enormously broad strokes and interchanging key elements haphazardly Atwood has failed to treat the subjects with the respect they deserve.

I take revolutions seriously because I like to study them. Virtually everything wrong or right with the world can be traced back to one revolution or another.

>>84352088
I have never enjoyed a Zac Snyder kino but I'd never interfere with his work. I appreciate that he sincerely cares for the art and gets things done. I think his views on the art are garbage but at least there's passion and hard work in what he does. And not my politics specifically, just one politics. Doesn't matter which one, I'd take a coherent state which I don't agree with over the cultural free for all we have now.

>>84352064
>name me a single show or politician that has exclusively talked in length about male suffering?
This is actually a fairly prominent issue, just it's often not so on the nose about it so it's easy to forget.
True Detective
Taxi Driver
Drive
Fight Club
American Psycho
American Gigolo

>>84349669
All female stories should just be called: The never ending complaint. Tell women you only watch things that are 95% about taking action because you are a man not a set of ears.

File: 1436136544279.png (60KB, 700x566px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 700x566px

>>84352304

>when a MRA starts dating literally any woman: the thread

>>84352149
>Iran, the United States, Africa and The Philippines aren't comparable
It's not the countries she's comparing though, it's the level of religious fundamentalism and its ability to restrain the lives of ordinary people. While there might be large cultural and ethnic disparities, the focus is more on how regardless of your gender or background, these theocracies are brutally oppressive.

>Revolutions are incredibly complex events
Most of the story takes place after the revolution though, in the same way 1984 doesn't explain in immense detail how the world came to be. In fact, 1984 does a lot of similar things to The Handmaid's Tale, do you dislike that as well?

>but that's why I think she should have set it in space
Then all empathy would have been lost. She's showing you how awful things have been in Iran and is now framing that in our own society. Maybe it's not 100% realistic, but why does it have to be?

>but I can't imagine American revolutionaries using Chrsitianity to justify these particular actions
I mentioned it before, you're being too specific. You're falling into the trap of focusing on Christianity or 'American' culture, when they're only a flavor text to the message beneath. If she had set the book in Iran, then it would have been an Iranian revolution with Islam to justify the atrocities. If she set it in Russia, it would have been a Russian revolution with Orthodox Christianity.

She used the US because it's now the home of Western civilization and most of her readership likely comes from there. It's an empathetic tale that puts the reader in the position of an Iran-like situation, but with a society they know and are comfortable with.

>It's too far divorced from reality to work
I think you're getting irrationally defensive now. The Christian Right were and still are a thing. Much of the public was immensely concerned about their ability to influence politics and this is only going back a decade or so.

>>84352344
Yeah this is pathetic.
Enjoy your Tuesday

>>84352337
>All female stories should just be called: The never ending complaint.
Kek

>>84350411
Right so in your version who is the protagonist? A fertility man who is living in paradise?

How about the fertile women, are they also upper classes with their own harem?

>>84352394
DEUS VULT amirite fellow MAGApedes haha xD SHADILAY KEK CRUSADES WHEN haha lol

>>84352307
>Succinctly, revolutions are an extremely complicated matter and what happened in Iran and other nations were extremely intricate affairs made possible by the idiosyncrasies of each time and place. By choosing to deal with these events painting in enormously broad strokes and interchanging key elements haphazardly Atwood has failed to treat the subjects with the respect they deserve.
If that's your point then fair enough, I was mainly refuting the idea that the Handmaid's Tale (the book) is bad in all aspects
The book just simply isn't for you
It's purpose isn't in anyway aligned with what you want to get out of it as a reader

>>84350411
>have infertile men being regarded as inferior/lower class and have them serve as the cogs as society (also realistic)
You are not too wrong I don't think. Those are the exact army men who immediately left their post when ISIS started over running iraq. They have zero incentive to help others uphold their harems hence why you get millions of young refugee MEN coming to any place with gibs.

File: 1498092446699.png (247KB, 737x637px) Image search: [Google]

247KB, 737x637px

>>84352344

>>84352248
I'm not even a practicing Christian. I know that shitting on something labelled feminist comes with a mountain of connotations but try ditching those for a moment and just judging me by what I'm writing, not what the neckbeard you're picturing me as in your head is shouting.

By demanding any degree of suspension of disbelief in crafting a narrative which supposedly deals with real world issues Atwood has failed. This story isn't teaching anybody anything about the nature of revolution and corrupt/oppressive regimes. If you want to learn about those go read about the real ones. I'm not saying that Christianity is too pure to be linked to any wrongdoing. I'm saying that the particular wrongdoing Atwood has made up is so divorced from the scope of reality that it makes Handmaid's Tale useless as a cautionary tale.

>>84352337
I'll never shilling this. 'Swastika Night' by Katherine Burdekin is a masterpiece of dystopic fiction.

>>84352391
Religious fundamentalism doesn't exist in a vacuum and theocracies aren't oppressive because they're theocracies. If you don't deal with idiosyncrasies you can't say anything meaningful on these subjects.
>1984
I'm not actually that big on 1984. But Orwell's work is different to Atwood's in that his had an unmistakably clear target. Like Atwood though, the real thing is where you'll actually learn. 1984 is only really good for stimulating surface level almond-activation in the vein of 'holy shit if the government literally watched me 24/7 and killed me for a word of dissent that'd be horrific.' If I were to recommend one book to teach you about the real horrors of totalitarianism however that book would be 'The Gulag Archipelago.'

>empathy would have been lost
I disagree. By setting it in America she estranged Iran and distracted readers by inviting contemporary comparison. It was a bad move. And the lack of realism destroys the supposed warning quality/message of the story by rendering it shallow.

>>84352627
I just bought that book yay

File: They're there for abortion rights, didn't the protagonist of Handmaid's Tale lose her child and feel horrible about it.png (293KB, 483x565px) Image search: [Google]

293KB, 483x565px

>>84352391
>You're falling into the trap of focusing on Christianity or 'American' culture, when they're only a flavor text to the message beneath
I agree that they're only flavour. That's why I think the story should be set in space. You acknowledge my thinking as a trap, I didn't think this immediately after reading it, I only argue this point because like you I know that the trap exists, and I believe that its existence undermines the novel's supposed purpose. By setting it in space there'd be no trap, no false comparisons to be made. It'd just get people thinking about totalitarianism and the tools that tyrants and corrupt regimes use to oppress us. But instead she set it in the Christian US and you get pic related. And if it were Russia or wherever else the trap would exist. Pure hypothetical scenarios avoid these traps, that's why writers first started using them.

>The Christian Right were and still are a thing. Much of the public was immensely concerned about their ability to influence politics and this is only going back a decade or so
The story isn't about their influencing politics, it's about them violently wresting control of the entire country and imposing warped Old Testament law over everybody. How is writing about that remotely productive?

>>84352627
>I'm saying that the particular wrongdoing Atwood has made up is so divorced from the scope of reality

We know that's what you're saying and you're just plain wrong. American Christians are capable of terrible things too. On a systematic scale, yep, we know they are capable of that.

>b-but we've been slightly more inclusive the last 50 years

The bible expressly allows for the subjugation of women. It's absolutely plausible that the United States falls on very hard times, the kind of times that fell on Iraq by the early 2000s. You're free to just say "that'll never happen" but you're a moron if you say that. Current power goes out, new power comes in. Who is to say it's not Christian Fundamentalists? ISIS itself is only a few thousand people strong, are you going to next tell me there are not several thousand closeted American Biblical Fundamentalists that would find a society like in the book preferable to the status quo? And that it's simply impossible for them to be 'bad guys' solely because they are Christian and American?

>>84349669
>come up with a much better take on the idea and explain it over the next 10 minutes
let's hear it

>>84349876
All I know about her is that she wrote some fanfiction about The Odyssey that was focused on Penelope because Homer didn't write about the plight of women

>>84352627
>If you don't deal with idiosyncrasies you can't say anything meaningful on these subjects.
It's not like she's breaking new ground here, I imagine most of her readers would agree that religious extremism is detestable. The story is empathetic in nature and also an interesting look at how misinterpretations of any religion, Christianity included, can create these oppressive theocracies.

Also, this feels like a really poor argument and you keep using it. She's not going to write a 2,000 page treatise on precisely which parts of the Bible could be misinterpreted and how. We know Christianity has been historically used to oppress and subjugate people, so there's already a precedent for it.

>1984 is only really good for stimulating surface level almond-activation in the vein of 'holy shit if the government literally watched me 24/7 and killed me for a word of dissent that'd be horrific.
...Did you just have a stroke? That's barely comprehensible and it doesn't even address one of the major points of 1984. It was clearly inspired by authoritarian type Socialist movements, like what Orwell would have seen in the USSR and when involved in the Spanish civil war. The book transplants those types of governance onto the UK, in an effort to drive home their brutality. Much like how The Handmaid's Tale domesticates the Iranian Revolution.

>And the lack of realism destroys the supposed warning quality/message of the story by rendering it shallow.
I think you're the only one I've met making this particular complaint, actually. Most readers are ostensibly able to extract some level of realism from the novel and it has struck a chord with many feminists and other activists, for better or worse. I don't feel anything has been destroyed, personally.

>>84350295
Different guy here. The Hitler comparison doesn't really work since he depended on forging an us vs them sense of German nationalism that played heavily on perceived wrongs inflicted by a spiteful Europe. There was a strong underlying resentment and sense of collective unity based on that and a mostly homogenised culture. I'm not sure how a hyper-conservative version of Christianity magically taking root and spreading like super cancer across the planet is comparable.

>>84351403
I'd prefer it if nobody pissed and moaned about how hard life is, but it is a bit ridiculous how everyone apart from white males are allowed to indulge themselves about how "oppressed" they are but when white men do it it's suddenly considered immature.

>>84351432
>Holy shit. You... I...
Stopped right there. You're clearly a monumental faggot.

>>84353000
Because white men aren't oppressed in the western world. Not sure how it looks in South America, Africa or Asia.

>>84352441
It's purpose isn't in anyway aligned with what anybody should want to get out of it. If Atwood meant to meaningfully explore authoritarianism, systematic oppression, the darker side of American Christianity or any of the other issues the book/show/movie are supposedly about I believe that she failed.

What did you want out of it? Which hypothetical reader is satisfied by The handmaid's Tale? The only one I can imagine is a woman who gets a kick out of victimization (a fairly common type, which would account for Atwood's success).

>>84352672
Swastika Night? Good stuff. Identity politics solved way back before WW2. Burdekin was so much smarter than anybody knew.

>>84352806
Are American Christians specifically capable of a violent coup followed by Sharia-tier oppression? And I don't mean capable in the sense that I'm capable of ramming my fingers into my eyeballs at any given moment in time, I mean is that within the scope of probability? Don't think of access to guns or anything. Just, is the will to do it there? Do you sincerely believe that this kind of sentiment lurks underneath American Christianity? Does anybody?

>we
I'm not a Christian. Or at least, not much of one. I just asked you to try talking to me, not the retarded mental sparring partner you practice on during the day. There's a real person here putting together tangible thoughts which are accessible to you. Draw your meme-texts from my posts.

>The bible expressly allows for the subjugation of women
Yes it does.
>It's absolutely plausible that the United States falls on very hard times, the kind of times that fell on Iraq by the early 2000s
This is already such an enormous leap that one has to wonder why we don't just set the story on Mars.
>there are not several thousand closeted American Biblical Fundamentalists that would find a society like in the book preferable to the status quo
That's exactly what I believe. But I don't believe Christians are too pure for evil. Stop saying that.

>>84350727
>Yes, I'm an idiot for implying that causality exists.
lol wtf does that even mean?

>>84350063
Fascism, communism or a military dictatorship are infinitely more plausible. Something even approaching this isn't in the realm of possibility unless the US balkanizes and it happens in say Utah or what have you.

Also
>Western christians, esp hard core ones, don't condone FGM.
>Or chattel slavery
>This is going back hundreds upon hundreds of years
>Bullshit half assed sterility trope
>Totally disregarding that Christians = 1 man + 1 woman. Fertile women would be quickly married off to men of good stock/well off/etc

>>84350411
>And if you wanted to make this about a theocratical government (I think religion would fall by the wayside in a more primitive society such as this, but it's a direction you can take to make the story more interesting), guess which religion condones harems (and multiple brides if you want to make the harems more religion-friendly) and is shit to women? Islam. It's a perfect religion for this sort of crisis.

A series/movie like "Not Without My Daughter" isn't going to get made nowadays. Anything condescending to any religion but Christianity is a guaranteed black list. That said if you encounter a dumb bitch who watches this drivel, do point them to that movie.

>>84353041
No one is actively oppressed in the Western World.

None. Zero.

But that comment is a 6th Holocaust.

>>84353047
No, Gulag Archipelago

>>84352750
>By setting it in space there'd be no trap, no false comparisons to be made
And in effect you would remove the real-world nature from the book, which is precisely what she wanted in the first place. I get the feeling you would immediately complain about the lack of nuance in her space world anyway.

>It'd just get people thinking about totalitarianism and the tools that tyrants and corrupt regimes use to oppress us
Which isn't the point. It's specifically about religious extremism and how anything, even your precious Christianity, can be misinterpreted.

>How is writing about that remotely productive?
Why does it have to be productive? Christ, man. This point is nonsense. She's under no obligation to make her writing productive or influential, it's just an interesting book.

Why are you so uncomfortable with it?

>>84353041
>oppressed

I guess it depends on what you mean by this but all men, whites included, are fucked over in a variety of ways (family court, victims of violence, suspicion of wrongdoing with children to name a few)

>>84350180
>Barely explain your high concept
>Like, you don't even try to make it feasible or realistic
>A massive societal change that should take decades happens in a year
>Everyone is okay with this

Look, the show is great, but the premise is still the worst thing about it.
They should have just winged it and made it about an actual woman under Sharia law, fuck the salon articles.
I mean, why waste time going through all this trouble when the real deal already exists?

>>84350671
>Nazism was a result of decades of a changing political landscape.
And the introduction of Sharia law wouldn't be? Islam has a strong enough presence and a good enough image in western culture that it could emerge as the dominant religion in a time of crisis. The problem is the Christianity has been slowly eaten away by cultural nihilism, waffling middle-class spiritualism, and the trendy atheist movement. Unfortunately a spiritual void cannot exist in humanity, which is why no society has survived more than a few decades with the absence of religion. Now that Christianity is gone, the most likely thing is that a kind of "westernized" Islam will take hold, mixing Islam in its purist form with the aforementioned spiritualist gobbledygook.

>>84352627
>I disagree. By setting it in America she estranged Iran and distracted readers by inviting contemporary comparison. It was a bad move. And the lack of realism destroys the supposed warning quality/message of the story by rendering it shallow.
The success of the work disagrees with you, millions were capable of empathizing with the story BECAUSE it was set close to home

It also probably wasn't conceived as a cautionary tale to the US with Christianity, but a cautionary tale to any country with any belief system, but once again was tailored to the culture the author knows most about and the culture that her core audience knows most about

>>84350369
I know "modern" pretty much means yesterday for you, but there used to not be Muslims in Albania, or the former Yugoslavia, or Anatolia (Constantinople), or Cyprus

>>84350140
it happened in Iran, Afghanistan and now starting to happen in Turkey

>>84350411
>I think religion would fall by the wayside in a more primitive society such as this
Dumbest thing ive read today.

>>84352939
>an interesting look at how misinterpretations of any religion, Christianity included, can create these oppressive theocracies
The point about the story being empathetic in nature I can agree on being not really a problem, but the religion point I still think is simply too shallow to carry any worthwhile meaning. You can't just point at a line in a bible and turn the United States into Afghanistan. I know the book doesn't do this but it goes back to what I said about intricacy and idiosyncrasies. There's so much that goes into creating an authoritarian state that it feels like an insult to narrow it down to hard times and a few choice lines from the particular faith's book of choice.

>Christianity has been historically used to oppress and subjugate people, so there's already a precedent for it.
Has it though? Christians have oppressed and subjugated people for certain but I don't think that Christianity has ever been an integral element to it. 'Christians in all but thought and action' and all that.

I'm not saying get specific necessarily, as I keep saying, why not go to Mars? Either get specific, or if you want to paint in broad strokes go so broad that you don't get stuck with these absurd leaps in logic and awkward parallels to reality which only serve to clutter your point.

>did you just have a stroke?
no. Which major point of 1984 did I miss? Now I can't understand you.

>I think you're the only one I've met making this particular complaint, actually. Most readers are ostensibly able to extract some level of realism from the novel and it has struck a chord with many feminists and other activists, for better or worse. I don't feel anything has been destroyed, personally.
How many of them have taken anything of value from the text do you think? We'd really have to speak to several people who'd read the book to reach a conclusion here but I personally think that Atwood hamstrung her message with her particular choice of setting.

>>84350666
I live in the UK and Sharia courts have literally organized honour killings and helped cover up the sexual crimes of their Muslim buddies. The British police don't give a fuck because they have to do about 5 hours of paper work for every arrest they make and they also don't want to be called racist.

>>84353066
For fuck sake.

>Fascism, communism or a military dictatorship are infinitely more plausible.
Yeah because there's a really big fascist or communist presence in the US.

>>Western christians, esp hard core ones, don't condone FGM.
>>Or chattel slavery
The book was inspired by Islamic extremism after the Iranian Revolution.

>>Totally disregarding that Christians = 1 man + 1 woman.
They specifically show how the religious rulers are distorting scripture for their own policies.

>>84350411
>guess which religion condones harems (and multiple brides if you want to make the harems more religion-friendly) and is shit to women
All of them.

>>84353047
>It's purpose isn't in anyway aligned with what anybody should want to get out of it. If Atwood meant to meaningfully explore authoritarianism, systematic oppression, the darker side of American Christianity or any of the other issues the book/show/movie are supposedly about I believe that she failed.
That isn't really her purpose, and I've stated what her purpose was plenty
Her purpose was to call the attention of domestic readers who can usually disregard foreign problems because THAT is so far from their reality by writing a book closer to it. And it worked

>>84350063
Most places on planet earth are precious resource based and by necessity treat their population like trash because spending any money of them won't help you get diamonds or oil better. In a place like America which doesn't treat its population like trash because that means they're better at getting diamonds and oil from other people, yes, it's completely unthinkable.

>>84353080
Considering that the Republican Healthcare plan wants to include pregnancy and Caesarean section as a preexisting condition i disagree with your point. While we are on the subject given how often a polic can get away with killing a black person then I'd say that blacks are oppressed as well.

>>84351498
>don't teach evolution at all and teach abstinence-based sexual education.

Yeah like somehow in your irrational mind that can be compared to FGM and chattel slavery

>>84353120
>Gulag Archipelago
Also very patrician.

>>84353131
>space would remove the real-world nature from the book
I think that a sufficiently skilled writer could still pull it off, do people identify with the protagonist's American-ness or her femininity and her struggle? Wouldn't be much of a stretch at all for a half-decent science-fiction writer to create an America-like setting that isn't America and an Abrahamic-like religion that isn't Christianity or Islam and the tradeoff of losing these half-truths and disbelief suspension-requiring happenings seems more than worth it to me. I think that the story could easily have resonated if set outside of the US but Atwood just had to be all Canadian about it because her #1 goal in life is apparently to be taught in high schools until the end of time.

>specifically about religious extremism
The point about religious extremism is more hurt than any other by her choice of setting. This thread ought to be proof enough, the stretch required to accept a totalitarian Christian theocracy springing up in the US is so much that many readers are simply put off and won't have her message. I know I'm clearly a minority here but there's never only one. Granted, people like me are often historyfaggots who know perfectly well how seemingly innocuous things can turn horrific but I still think that overall she's hurt herself by using the US.

>why does it have to be productive
She clearly wrote this to serve some kind of purpose beyond entertaining plebs and making money. The points I'm suggesting I'm suggesting because I think that they would have allowed her to hit this purpose more strongly. Her book could have been simultaneously more interesting and less controversial if she hadn't gone with this absurd American setting.

>why are you uncomfortable with it
Bad science-fiction burns my asshole because there's so much of it and all of the good authors are being forgotten.

>>84353047
>Are American Christians specifically capable of a violent coup followed by Sharia-tier oppression?

Yes.

>but like, are you like, serious haha you can't be serious though right?

Yes, I am.

>This is already such an enormous leap

Whatever, like I said, you're free to just go "LALALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU US GOOD CHRISTIAN BOYS NEVER WOULD HURT A FLY" and "LALALA IM NOT LISTENING THE USA IS DOING GOOD AND IT ALWAYS WILL I MEAN IT COULD NEVER FALL INTO RUIN LIKE EVERY OTHER HISTORICALLY STRONG EMPIRE IN ALL OF HUMAN HISTORY"

>>84353244
>You can't just point at a line in a bible and turn the United States into Afghanistan.
>Has it though?
Yes. Are you forgetting the thousands of years of Christian history, where nations were invaded and conquered in the name of God? Where innocent people were executed for following the "wrong" faith? The Witch Hunts? The Inquisition?

She doesn't need to point at a line in the Bible, the history of Christianity across the world is already evidence enough. There's a precedent for theocracy and brutal oppression which she's playing off of.

>but I don't think that Christianity has ever been an integral element to it
Except for when the Pope, the man closest to God, has called for bloodshed and rallied thousands of soldiers for some insane cause?

>why not go to Mars?
Because the tale is meant to be empathetic, as I said. She wants the reader to put themselves in the shoes of a person really experiencing a theocratic coup. That's why the scenes with them getting coffee or jogging are used. It's a jarring juxtaposition to go from that to then being a sex-slave, which is only enhanced by how, in their former lives, they did things all of us did.

>Which major point of 1984 did I miss?
I explained it before. It's an allegory for the USSR brand of Socialism.

>How many of them have taken anything of value from the text do you think?
See the picture in : >>84352750 A lot of young women have clearly been motivated by the book. I believe that's a good thing.

>>84350063
For one thing, nobody would wife barren females, everybody would want to marry the healthy fertile ones.

>>84353222
And which of them is Western or Christian?

File: 1445712177293.jpg (23KB, 480x600px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 480x600px

>>84350894

>>84353041
Yes they are. We're all oppressed in different ways.

>>84351524
the true form of christianity never condoned FGM or Chattel slavery ffs

The worst shit that happened is executing witches (less christian and more occult bullshit taken too far) and stoning adultresses.
Women weren't beat or flogged in the streets for showing -a slight fuckup in their headdress or what have you like what happens in literally the muslim world.

You can't compare, you just can't. Western ideals and morality are intrinsically linked to Christian dogma.
The only thing I can come up with besides the aforementioned is not allowing female priests (but they made up for this with nunnery's). Meanwhile in non-normie Judaism and regular Islam a woman cannot even enter a temple/mosque

>>84353490
>her #1 goal in life is apparently to be taught in high schools until the end of time.
Sounds to me like a pretty good reason to do it then
>Write a book espousing your beliefs and morals
>Adapt it in such a way as to get entire generations to read it
>Those generations then internalize your ideas
She literally did the best thing a writer with the goal of persuasion could do

>>84353204
>the success of the work disagrees with you
I didn't mean it was a bad move from an economic point of view, I'm quite sure that the book wouldn't have been half as successful if set in face, I think that it was a bad move from an artistic position. Any attempted statement regarding the nature of religion in oppression is confused by awkward parallels to reality which she invites by setting the story so close to home for her readers. Of course most readers don't give a shit but most readers are just medieval peasants but literate and well-dressed so who cares what they took from the book? Financial success is a poor indicator of literary success.

>>84353248
>Sharia courts have literally organized honour killings and helped cover up the sexual crimes of their Muslim buddies
Covertly covering sex-crimes I can believe but I can't believe that any court technically supported by the government could organize a killing of any kind. Is this just a rumour of some kind or was this discovered, proven and tolerated?

>>84353352
>Her purpose was to call the attention of domestic readers who can usually disregard foreign problems because THAT is so far from their reality by writing a book closer to it. And it worked
I know that proving whether it worked or not is a big topic but I think we should at least try to discuss it before drawing any conclusions. How do you define 'worked'? Is the state of women living under oppressive theocracies a big issue on the Canadian/American feminist agenda thanks to Atwood? Was it for a time? Is it now that the show is a thing? Even if nothing is being done can we see any sign at all that anybody cares as a result of Atwood's work?

>>84350063
Almost the entirety of the country would be against the extremists, and America is very well-armed, very militarized and very de-centralized, so the extremists would be taken care of quickly even if some of the military sided with them. There's also the line of succession, so even if the president dies someone else takes over, and if that person dies there's many others in line.

The whole premise is too ridiculous, it's just a feminist persecution fantasy. It's only acclaimed because of virtue signalling.

File: 1470160681156.jpg (56KB, 960x541px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 960x541px

>>84353452

>>84353490
>do people identify with the protagonist's American-ness or her femininity and her struggle?
I believe all of those factors are significant in the use of her character. She's an "everyman", that is to say her life is unremarkable and ordinary until the coup happens, at which point she's thrust into being this central cog in society. The fact that she's a typical American woman aids in the audience becoming the character and seeing things from her point of view. The contrast between this lady getting coffee and then being forced to endure state-sanctioned rapes is only made bolder by how simple and relatable her life was before it all happened.

>I think that the story could easily have resonated if set outside of the US
I don't think being set in the US loses anything that it could have had from being set in space. In fact, it may have been a conscious decision to provide a narrative relevant to what was occurring politically at that time.

>This thread ought to be proof enough, the stretch required to accept a totalitarian Christian theocracy springing up in the US is so much that many readers are simply put off and won't have her message
Please, this thread is only proof that the bulk of /tv/ will disregard a TV show just because it has a feminist following. If anything, the narrative suffers from being released in this day and age because of how touchy everyone has become. It's clearly not an indictment of the US or of Christianity specifically.

File: 1441340393204.png (303KB, 588x720px) Image search: [Google]

303KB, 588x720px

>>84353452
>given how often a polic can get away with killing a black person then I'd say that blacks are oppressed as well.
>being violent towards police officers and then feigning innocence now counts as oppression

When did the cucks arrive here?

>>84353726
>it's just a feminist persecution fantasy

Wow... it's... almost like she's a fiction writer.

>>84353080
White men are passively oppressed, and non white men don't belong anyway

>>84353730
>Nightmarish legal proceedings
What nightmares, they all know each other.
>>84353816
>being violent towards police officers
I see, could you perhaps explain to me how a 12 year old playing with a toy gun in a open carry state getting gunned down with no chance of explaining himself is being violence towards the police? Or can you perhaps explain how running away from the police is being violent towards them? How about telling the police you have a gun and licences to carry and then when the police tells you to get said license and gun they shoot you dead, how is that violent towards the police?

>>84353558
>See the picture in : >>84352750 A lot of young women have clearly been motivated by the book. I believe that's a good thing.
Are you actually praising LARPing autists?
>I can't get an abortion. This is JUST like my favourite tv show!

>>84353513
Why do you bother posting here when you clearly prefer discourse with the imaginary retard who exists only inside your head?

>>84353558
>Violent Christian history
This is more of a topic for an entire /his/ thread. We're back at the issue of broad strokes. I don't think that there has been a single invasion in history which was carried out purely for the sake of any god, there are always secular aims hiding underneath. Even the most cousing-fuckingest Muslim leader that ever Akbarred had Earthly motivations for what he did.
>innocent people were executed for following the 'wrong' faith
People have been executed for an absurd amount of things over the course of history. And again, I'd imagine in most if not all Christian cases, as with most others, there would be a secular factor making it all possible. Religion doesn't exist in a vacuum.
>There's a precedent for theocracy and brutal oppression which she's playing off of.
Broad strokes. There really isn't anything like what she created. Of course a layman of history-study (most readers) would have a vague mental image of Christianity in line with what you're describing which Atwood would be playing off of, but this is such a shallow interpretation of history that it's impossible to build a narrative of any valuable substance using it is a foundation.
>Pope calling for Bloodshed
Secular motivations. You have to understand the secular motivations behind these things. What happened with the Crusades and all of these other violent times were countless factors all playing into each other. Not saying Christianity is divorced from the events at all, but calling it an explicitly Christian event is hopelessly ignorant.
>no empathy on Mars
I'll ask again, is it explicitly the protagonist's American-ness which readers empathize with? I think that her struggle is human enough that a competent writer could make it work without that.
>USSR Socialism
Point still stands, it'd be stronger giving the straight Russian story

>>84353906
>Are you actually praising LARPing autists?

Would you actually give a shit if they weren't feminists? They're fighting for their beliefs against a completely fucked up law. So yeah, I am praising them.

>>84353280
The point is Christianity is the only religion where criticizing it is socially acceptable/tolerated in the Western World. The other Abrahmic religions get a free pass, not to mention Hinduism, Buddism, etc

>>84350063
>Is it really unthinkable that a brutal theocracy could overthrow the government and implement a nightmarish reality for females?
Yeah, it's called Islam, and feminists are importing as many of them as fast as the law of thermodynamics allows.

Atwood's Handmaid's Tale isn't a warning about a dystopian future. It's erotica. These women want brutal men to force them into burkas and the kitchen more than they want air.

how bleak is it? I feel like watching some miserable and depressing tv.

>>84350063
Really, it should have been a brutal atheistic regime that took over in the name of preserving the species.

What's that you say? Atheists of that grain aren't populous or influential enough to induce such a massive flip in American attitudes? Bah! Don't you know that atheist regimes have historically been some of the most oppressive on Earth? All we need is that historical precedent! It's not like the Communist parties that birthed then were huge and powerful at first, either. Also, clearly all other atheists would fall in line with the regime's thinking, as would a bunch of non-atheists. Because reasons.

What, you say I'm bullshitting and it could never happen? There's too much nuance eliminated for the sake of the story (or poorly concealed personal hateboner)? To that I say you are an ignorant angry neckbeard whose feelings got hurt. Boo hoo. Go back to /sci/.

>>84353925
I wouldn't give a shit if they hadn't played dress up like children. Lemme just go make an appeal to the Senate pretending to be Aragorn.

>>84353941
>not to mention Hinduism, Buddism, etc
Because Hinduism has to many rules for us idiot westerns to keep up with and Buddhism is flawless
>>84353961
>and feminists are importing as many of them
To you have a single piece of evidence to back this up?
>. It's erotica.
Right you're insane

>>84353923
>s-stop posting
>I'm not a Christcuck (oh btw I really am but for some reason I keep saying I'm not really Christian but then follow that up immediately by saying I actually am haha I'm totally starting from a rational position too and not blindly defending the faith my parents indoctrinated me into and I'm too embarassed or afraid to denounce anonymously online)

>>84353923
>Religion doesn't exist in a vacuum
Okay, but it was clearly an influential factor. It doesn't have to be the sole motivator. So long as it contributed to the death and dismay of so many, then there is blood on Christian hands.

>Broad strokes
Which is kind of the point.

>There really isn't anything like what she created.
There doesn't have to be. There has been oppressive Christian rule in the past, there's no reason why it couldn't exist again. Hell, it already does in some parts of Christian Africa, where they try to live exclusively by the 10 Commandments.

>but this is such a shallow interpretation of history
A deep, revisionist interpretation of history isn't required though. There has been Christian-based oppression in the past, there is Christian-based oppression in the present. Her new 'society' is predicated off of the fact that religious extremists, no matter the faith, can do deplorable things when given control of people.

>Secular motivations.
>Not saying Christianity is divorced from the events at all
See my first point.

>I'll ask again, is it explicitly the protagonist's American-ness which readers empathize with?
See the first point I made here: >>84353792

>>84354013
>LET THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE COME FAAAAARTH

If you count the amount of random guards there are in this show you realize it's just as much of a dystopia for the men. When 95% of the male population has to stand outside preventing rich peoples rape victims from escaping your world sucks.

>>84354030
>Women are dominated by men and treated like property
>Used as servants and sex toys
>Fertility is rare and children are not a common consequence of dom sex

It's the Story of O, m8.

>>84353941
Because Christians represent a major part of the Western world, where those other religions don't. They have the ability to actually influence politics, while Islam can posture at best.

>>84353692
>She literally did the best thing a writer with the goal of persuasion could do
I've been spending this entire thread trying to say that her book does a miserable job of conveying what it's supposedly trying to persuade people of. Look at the image in >>84352750 and tell me that Atwood has won herself a worthy legacy. She tried to write a cautionary tale about the shock of revolution and the dangers of theocracy and wound up a trendy meme for third-wave feminists to namedrop whenever the oppressive establishment tries to protect their own children from their callous disregard for life.

>>84353792
I think that it's perfectly possible to make a character relatable without placing them in the same place as the reader. The point of science-fiction is that you're able to disregard reality to make a point. And apparently it's just me but I find the self-insertion illusion ruined by the fact that this supposedly very relatable society 180s into a dystopic nightmare. This thread is genuinely making me a feel a bit insane knowing that I'm the only one who thinks this.

Being set in another world would have allowed it to ditch the disbelief which I, and apparently only I, feel when presented with the US as a totalitarian theocracy. And the point of relevance only makes it harder for me, but if I can take one thing from this thread it's that I don't interpret things how other people do.

And I don't think that the poor reaction is purely a reaction to feminism. I know that I certainly don't mind feminism in science-fiction as long as it's done intelligently, a large part of it seems to be that the show really does seem to be a deliberate indictment of the US and Christianity. Well not so much that, but it was definitely produced now to capitalize on the general zeitgeist of our time, which is very anti-US and anti-Christian.

>>84353513
Christianity, even at it's worst, was never Sharia tier. This is what people aren't getting.
A fundamentalist christian government seizing power due to collapse/balkanization would at worse heavily penalize or force single women to get married while destroying any trace of modern feminism.

>>84353558
>The Witch Hunts?
Were highly localized, steeped in non-christian occult and paganistic bullshit, and when they did happen it tended to target prostitutes and crones.

>The Inquisition?
Coincides with the Reconquista, (of spain/southern europe from Islam)
Kicked out or killed Muslims and Dhimni Jews
Beyond that the annihilation of the Cathar's and Waldensians is usually credited with the inquisition (but it wasn't nec. the Spanish Inquisition)
The Cathars and Waldensians were christian faiths btw. Competition for the Roman Catholic church, so they snuffed it out - the church got it's just desserts when the Protestant Reformation hit like a brick shithouse (resulting in the 100 years war)

File: 1456364098902.jpg (48KB, 720x535px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 720x535px

>>84354260
>Christianity, even at it's worst, was never Sharia tier.

>>84353941
Not really, Christianity is only being criticized HERE because the author grew up in a Christian country

The people making the TV show just adapted the book. If they had changed the religion then they would have in some ways trolly experiment-ed themselves.
Leaving the religion that was already written about in the very popular and widely taught book isn't taking a personal attack on Christianity, while changing the religion means you are attacking that religion specifically

>>84353559
I mean I would never marry but I would fucking LOVE a barren bitch just so I could bust in her 24/7 with no repercussions

>>84354290
Nice try, reddit.

>>84354172
>I think that it's perfectly possible to make a character relatable without placing them in the same place as the reader.
Sure, it is possible. However I think it comes more easily when trying to tie in the life of the reader to the life of the character. Most people have gone jogging before, most people have had coffee, most people have had sexual partners, etc. Imagining someone with the life we all know suddenly losing it, for whatever reason, is a powerful contrast. A lot of people didn't seem to understand that, prior to 1979, most Iranians could walk around outside wearing jeans and button-up shirts. The country had discos and bars where young people would go. Part of why the revolution was so insane is because they lost all that. I think setting the book/show in the US is to really try and show people what it's like to lose it all. Conjuring up that feeling is important to the author, or so I feel.

>this supposedly very relatable society 180s into a dystopic nightmare
What if it's not so much about the very relatable society, but the very relatable characters within it? They're American, they're female, they lead regular lives. Disregarding just the society and focusing on them, which the show largely does, it probably the point.

>it was definitely produced now to capitalize on the general zeitgeist of our time, which is very anti-US and anti-Christian.
I will agree with this. The message of the author, I think, has been heavily distorted and misinterpreted by both people for and against the book.

>>84354088
>So long as it contributed to the death and dismay of so many, then there is blood on Christian hands.
If any contribution puts blood on your hands then there's Jew blood on the hands of Jews for the Holocaust. If they hadn't irritated the Germans with their presence and over-representation in white-collar crime the holocaust wouldn't have happened. An absurd example I know but I hope you get the point. If you want to talk factors everything contributes to everything. We can't truly say if anything was for better or worse until the end of time so until then it's only sensible to judge people by their intentions. How I see it is if their intentions were 'I'm going to kill these people because Jesus' then that's blood on Christian hands, if their thinking was 'I'm going to go invade and loot some foreign countries because $$$ and to justify it I'll tell shitkicking peasants that it's because Jesus' then that's not blood on Christian hands.

The point that you're attributing to Atwood's work
>the fact that religious extremists, no matter the faith, can do deplorable things when given control of people.
Is almost insultingly shallow. Believe it or not I've actually been trying to be generous towards her as a writer so far. If that was all she was getting at she did an abysmal job of it. The scenario she uses to demonstrate this point is unreal as to provide no insight into how these regimes come about and makes the whole story look like an excuse to paint Christians in a bad light. 'If [extremely improbable sequence of events] the US could totally become a totalitarian theocracy' is very poor dystopic science-fiction. By not attempting to follow history or existing social trends she fails to give the reader any true insight into the nature of these regimes she's supposedly warning us against.

>>84353995
>book is inspired on an event where the country was turned into a brutal theocracy by extremists following an Abrahamic religion
>WHY DIDN'T THEY WRITE A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT BOOK INSPIRED BY COMPLETELY DIFFERENT EVENTS ABOUT A GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT ARE IN NO WAY COMPARABLE TO FOLLOWERS OF ABRAHAMIC RELIGIONS (AND MAY EVEN BE THE EXACT OPPOSITE)
huh

>>84353726
Honestly such a scenario would be a dream come true for a shitton of men, - to side with the extremists, and the implemented reality would never be as bad as the perversion the Handmaid's tale makes it out to be.
Women can't vote, are mostly out of the workforce, have to get married up or they get penalized, and those who resist get machinegunned?

It sounds like near literal perfection

Balkanization is right around the corner

>>84354260
>Christianity, even at it's worst, was never Sharia tier.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nf_Y4MbUCLY

>>84354353
>we wuz good boys n shiet christians never hurt anyone we didn't even burn witches and the inquisition had nothing to do with christianity and nothing bad ever happened as a result of the bible

>>84354260
>Christianity, even at it's worst, was never Sharia tier
Clearly you never heard of the Puritans

>>84354426
Spanish Inquisition was responsible for about as many deaths as bicycle accidents are now. It had a body count but it also ran for a damn long time.

>>84354369
Are you a big science-fiction reader? A hypothetical space-colony setting or whatever doesn't have to mean clunky space-suits and limited oxygen and everyone is a terraformer. You can recreate late 20th century America under a different name if you want with a paragraph's justification. My thinking behind the new setting is that it's now divorced from the minutiae of our time which makes thinking hypothetically cumbersome. She could still write about disco, coffee and jogging all she wanted and have her characters be as American as anything, just she'd be freed from the burden of having to rationalize The US turning into Afghanistan.

>>84354410
So what I wrote flew right over your head, huh?

>>84354426
>>84354461
And we still don't know how much of the Spanish Inquisition is Protestant propaganda

>>84354426
The Inquisition (and it's persecution of non-catholic Christians and blasphemers - numbers of which were relatively small compared to Muslims/Jews knocked off) was historically used as a thumb in the nose by protestant groups against Roman Catholicism - which is not christianity as a whole.
Today it has been perverted to define broad strokes transgressions commited by the medieval catholic church as the fault of Christianity as a whole

>>84354450
Oh the people who wanted to purge all the Catholic bullshit from the Anglican church? (CoE)
But were ultimately persecuted because you know, state (run) religion and all that jazz?

>>84354446
Torquemada did nothing wrong.

File: 1498535577154.gif (2MB, 393x561px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 393x561px

>>84349876
>Margaret atwood makes scfi nerds spaz out.

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

But I'm pretty sure she just said that shit cuz "scifi is mostly men and fuck men lel"

>>84354409
>If any contribution puts blood on your hands then there's Jew blood on the hands of Jews for the Holocaust.
Not getting into this. It's a logical fallacy to begin with and wholly irrelevant.

>If you want to talk factors everything contributes to everything.
This sounds like you're intentionally muddying the waters to take the blame away from Christianity. If everything contributes to everything, then everything (nothing) is to blame whenever something goes wrong. This kind of thinking is incredibly unproductive.

>no insight into how these regimes come
Because it's irrelevant. The focus isn't on the revolution, but the characters having to live day-to-day.

>If [extremely improbable sequence of events] the US could totally become a totalitarian theocracy
It's more like 'If you lived under a totalitarian theocracy..."

>By not attempting to follow history or existing social trends she fails to give the reader any true insight into the nature of these regimes
She did follow existing social trends, though. The Christian Right was and still is a powerful lobbying group in the United States, even more so back then. However, she did combine it with science fiction elements to create more of a 'what if' scenario. So there was a major war that shattered the US, there's steep population decline, fertility troubles, etc.

I believe you mentally constructed an ultimatum that Atwood never would have been able to follow up on. She's not going to provide a manual on how this supposed society could come about, because firstly it's not relevant, secondly it would draw the focus to Christianity and American culture which she didn't want, and thirdly you have already demonstrated a less mainstream interpretation of history so she was bound to upset you anyway.

>>84354716
Puritans where literally no fun allowed and the only reason they didn't turn England to a no fun allowed state was because of Charles II.

>>84353612
He's right though, unless you're saying OP is also wearing fedora.
After being rejected he will blame this show even more kek

A lot of you people are getting clouded by the current political climate and the tv series and are ignoring the time when this novel was written an the things that were happening in the world at the time.

>>84354546
>You can recreate late 20th century America under a different name if you want with a paragraph's justification.
She basically did that anyway, though. The US is split apart, a couple of states form their own society called Gilead, they base their doctrine off of an interpretation of Christianity.

>My thinking behind the new setting is that it's now divorced from the minutiae of our time which makes thinking hypothetically cumbersome.
I don't believe she expected readers to be so caught up on the minutiae of our time for a divorce to be made necessary. Not much is known about the world, at least from a macroscopic perspective. That's the subtle indication that you should be focusing more on the characters living under this oppressive rule, less so than how the rule came to be. If it's that much of a struggle, just fill in the blanks mentally.

>she'd be freed from the burden of having to rationalize The US turning into Afghanistan.
So you want her to write a pseudo-America where you can imagine everyone as regular Americans then being oppressed under a totalitarian theocracy? It seems like a long way to go, what happened to suspension of disbelief? She's a sci-fi writer after all.

>>84354735
>It's a logical fallacy
Explain. You wanted to talk contribution, cause and effect doesn't discriminate, all events cast a very wide net when fishing for factors.

>If everything contributes to everything, then everything (nothing) is to blame whenever something goes wrong
Now you're getting it. Blame is a stupid game with no winners. The sensible way to look at events is to try to make sense of how they happened by looking out in every direction. What did everyone involved want, how did they go about getting it, how did all of these conflicting desires get mangled by clashes and circumstance and what did we end up with?
>incredibly unproductive
only if you're playing the blame-game.

>the focus is on living day-to-day
If this were entirely true the setting could be shifted to picture perfect Golden Age Athens and nothing of substance would be lost.

>'If you lived under a totalitarian theocracy..."
How is this idea supposed to be meaningfully explored when it's so weakly established? And don't try telling me it's irrelevant.

>She did follow existing social trends
At the time the story was written the US and Canada had been moving steadily left for decades and this process has only been accelerating since first publication. The Christian Right obviously have political reach but to say that they're winning or even holding is a joke.

If she didn't want people to consider Christianity and American culture she wouldn't have set the story there, and I don't consider my ultimatum impossible. I think she half-assed her premise and crippled and serious message her work could have carried. I believe that she either should have ditched the semi-contemporary setting or gone further in depth with it. Both have been done by other writers successfully countless times.

>a less mainstream interpretation of history
mainstream interpretations of history are largely wrong and useless.

File: 1496015491117.jpg (141KB, 700x867px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 700x867px

>>84354030

>>84349669
Haven't watched it, but I can only guess Handmaid's Tale is feminist lefty misery porn. Am I right, here?

>>84354962
>she basically did
She didn't though, Gilead might seem far from her contemporary US but it still comes with too much baggage to serve as a useful example of anything.

>That's the subtle indication that you should be focusing more on the characters living under this oppressive rule, less so than how the rule came to be. If it's that much of a struggle, just fill in the blanks mentally.
I can appreciate this position, but the blanks are made problematic by American history. Using the US setting just seems to create a problem that she didn't need for no discernable gain. Why bother shackling yourself to a recognizable setting if you're going to twist it beyond belief?
>So you want her to write a pseudo-America where you can imagine everyone as regular Americans then being oppressed under a totalitarian theocracy? It seems like a long way to go, what happened to suspension of disbelief?
If she worked with a psuedo-US she'd have less baggage to work her way around. What you're presenting there as in impossible task is exactly what she did, only easier. She wrote about the real US turning into Afghanistan and was very successful about it.

>>84355060
Yes and?

Is this that show that's based entirely upon Islamic practices but they just said "Oh no it's actually Christian" instead?

File: OH NO.jpg (19KB, 378x386px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 378x386px

>>84350063

>>84355112
In a nutshell, you're spot on. 300 pages of autistic screeching about muh patriarchy. Funnily enough the Gilead government would still be vastly preferable to the feminist utopia of Atwood's wet dreams.

>>84351524
"Oh she's unfamiliar with middle eastern culture so she shouldn't write about it" is a ridiculous argument. If you are clearly inspired by an event then do some fucking research and educate yourself about the event and the culture associated with it. If a straight cis white male can write an intelligent book on the plight of a hermaphrodite who grows up as a woman then transitions to a man then an old washed up white woman can do the thirty minutes of research on Islam to write her shitty derivative dystopia story about it instead of a religion that in no way resembles how it appears in her work.

>>84349669
Does this show have a fat budget or did Hulu skimp on production values?

And OP, don't fret. This series attracts relapsed sluts with a dirty librarian aesthetic. It's made for a Hillary Won Universe, and is thus, a mistake, like Superbowl Champion caps made for the losers.

>>84349876
>Margaret atwood makes scfi nerds spaz out.

That was more to do with her publisher IIRC. Some snobbish remarks were made about The Handmaid's Tale "not being sci-fi because sci-fi is for nerds" or somesuch and then they had to backtrack hard when those comments were reported and were attributed to Atwood.

File: DAnvb0nXcAABxi-.jpg (27KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 400x400px

I enjoy it, it's "libtards get btfo: The show".

>>84349669

yikes anon go for it she's smitten

File: ann.jpg (76KB, 800x396px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 800x396px

Just tell her that Ann is best girl, and right about everything.

>>84351432
>Holy shit. You... I...
What kind of hipster faggot actually types like this. Lurk moar before contaminating this board, queer.

>>84351747

Because the author didn't want to be the next Salman Rushdie.

Christianity bad, Islam good.
It's that simple, Anon. Get with the program.

>>84351067

>Yeah in this day and age its pretty dumb but you have to remeber this was written when both Regan and Thatcher were in power, when bible thumping had reached a hight

Yeah, fuck those people for saying child-murder isn't OK and other things you don't like.
That's a literal micron away from literally installing some kind of massive evil KKKristian Rethuglican rape-patriarchy.

>>84353066
that movie sucks, anon.

>>84350624
>he thinks Karl Marc was charismatic
>doesnt know that karl marx lived in england, a country that didn't fall for communism

Guy was insane and died of poor hygiene you stupid leftie

>>84349669
>girl I'm into tells me she's been watching Handmaid's Tale
Fuckin' run for it anon. She's off the deep end already.

>>84353222
Don't forget Saudi-Arabia.

>>84353588
And how is that in any way relevant?

>>84349669

They made me read the book in school. It was a terrible book then, it's a terrible show now. The author is a pretentious twat so far up her own ass I'm surprised she doesn't collapse into a singularity.

It appeals to the same people now as it did then; idiots and virtue signaling drones.

The only places this type of thing is close to being a reality are the Islamic areas of the planet. But the same people who love this book/show would scream bloody murder if you said that to them and call you a "racist".

With the way they are forcing mass immigration from MENA areas into Europe and the West and the demographic growth rate differences between Islamic immigrants and native Europeans and whites they might get to see a version of their handmaid world before they die.

I dont watch this show and dont intend to, but you people sure love to whine and cry about shows that dont cater to your worldviews.
Cry me a fucking river

>>84361446
4chan has always been contrarian, so of course people here will shit on any show preaching the dominant western religion of our time, i.e. feminism. If our society actually was a patriarchy, all the contrarians would switch to praising the handmaid's tale without looking back.

File: 1497797734142.gif (613KB, 498x498px) Image search: [Google]

613KB, 498x498px

>>84361745
>feminism
>dominant
Feminism only has power on the internet

>>84350063
>Is it really unthinkable
It is if there is a fertility crisis.
>Oh shit we're so many infertile people
>These girls seem fertile, lets make this a nightmarish hell for them because Christianity or some shit.

OP here, back as promised, glad this thread sparked a lot of good discussion
>all these accusations about being from /r9k/
>from fedora tipping fags using terms like "christcuck"
Don't use /r9k/, I'm not a christcuck and I didn't even say anything edgy regarding women (besides calling Atwood a cunt, which she is). Nice projection.
>>84351445
Yeah no shit, her and I make fun of her orbiters in game and irl. Dudes are so thirsty it makes me look like a camel in comparison, it's great. I'd say she's a 7.5/10.
>>84360742
Not him, but my original assertion was that it was a dumb concept in regards to modern Christianity, not Islam. Which it is.
>>84350792
Said in OP that I had it explained to me, but no that didn't come up.
I deliberately asked if it portrayed every dude as better off and free of any sort of consequence for being sterile and she said "yeah basically".
Let me guess though, the dude trying to cover it up is portrayed as completely evil because him being found out as being infertile has no particularly damning consequences besides losing his social status/being embarrassed and he's willing to have women killed to maintain that?
Whereas what I suggested was that infertile men would be put to work/death and fear of that (while not justifying murder) is significantly more reasonable and sympathetic. It's a huge difference because of the stakes and the motivations.

File: net head.jpg (49KB, 300x419px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 300x419px

>>84350411
Dont let these miserable cunts shit on you...your ideas are in fact better than the show and far more interesting. With the downfall of the mainstream media it is inevitable that new studios will step up to fill the void that are less afraid to hurt fee fees in order to tell a good story. Write your own and find them or become the movement yourself and fund a studio.

>>84351403
>wanting to see the adverse effects for both genders
>means I am somehow insanely desperate for attention
It's called good storytelling anon.
>>84352064
>>84353000
are both entirely right by the way. Every group has struggles though I wouldn't say they were "oppressed", but obviously some are far more represented than others.
>>84351465
>Virgin Mary
I'm not sure what you're implying.
That people would believe a ton of bastard children were children of God?
Or are you just trying to make just enough sense to tip your fedora?
>>84351653
Bitter fedora detected.
>>84352424
In my version, I would say the people (men and women) who are dealing with the adverse effects of such a society are the protagonists. Not sure why you think I'm all in favour of a society I've plainly described as dystopic?
>not knowing why men would have harems and women wouldn't
It's like you don't even know basic biology.

>>84362173
lol

>>84361871
Various feminist policies are the law of the land all over the western world. Whenever affirmative action is espoused, whenever quotas for women are introduced, whenever an abortion is performed, whenever a lawsuit is filed because of sexual harassment, you can see feminism in action, and the list goes on. Never even mind the most obvious facts of women voting or holding office. At this stage, feminism wields far more political influence than christianity.

File: c8a82e1a-b160-45ee-9dfd-9557e67d5949-2060x1236.jpg (952KB, 2060x1236px) Image search: [Google]

952KB, 2060x1236px

it is not okey for this woman to have her body seen in London.

Thanks to a Muslim mayor and feminist lobby.

Progressives progress.

File: 5dennis.jpg (73KB, 988x543px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 988x543px

>>84349669
>>come up with a much better take on the idea and explain it over the next 10 minutes
cringe isn't a strong enough for the awkwardness of this

>>84352458
Very true.
>>84362173
Can't tell if this is bait or not, but thanks I guess.
I have no intention of actually making anything from my amateur premise though, but I hope someone else will eventually explore that sort of story.

>>84350083
How you ever heard a small thing called the Iranian revolution?

>>84361871
>he actually believes this
Did you think that everyone who heard and parroted this bullshit in college just "grew up" and let it go?

>>84350481
>there are actually people who think like this

>>84350437
>Slippery slope continues to be proven right
>McCarthyism also continues to be proven right.

The mind virus meme has been proven true.

>>84353452
>nigger pulls gun
>get shot
BUT HE DIN DO NUFFIN

>>84362755

Well yeah, it could happen in non-white countries. I mean of course if could happen there. Half of the nations in MENA are not that far from it happening right now.

But it could never happen in white nations. Of course within a few decades there won't be any majority white nations left if people have their way, so that's a bit of a moot point.

File: treytrey.jpg (314KB, 723x1106px) Image search: [Google]

314KB, 723x1106px

>>84353452

>Grab cops gun, gun goes off, start running away, cop gets out of car and yells for you to stop, turn around and charge him in a murderous rage, get shot

>Hands Up Dont Shoot! He didn't do nothing! He was a good boy! Black Lives Matter! etc, etc

>>84354446
Inquisition was nicer than secular authorities the overwhelming majority of the time.
The only reason the Christian past is looked at as cruel is because the present is so peaceful.

Witch burnings were dumb, but they weren't particularly common, plenty of people have been falsely accused of all kinds of things.
Witch trials didn't start with Christianity either, Pagans had their witchcraft trials as well.

>>84354446

Crusades were, for the most part, a defensive act.

>>84349669
>>realize how much of a fucking obnoxious autist I just came across as
Because you are

>>84349669
I turned it off 20 min into the first episode. This series has the smell of shit all over it.

I'll pass.

>>84355260
And feminists are usually willing to excuse barbarism towards women from brown cultures for unknown reasons. No one in the west who is complaining about manspreading or who is buying wonder woman shit en masse makes a peep about FGM in the 3rd world.

>>84361871
>laws to arrest the man in any domestic dispute don't exist
>laws that force workplaces to hire women and pander to them don't exist
>government funded colleges forcing men to take ridiculous sexual harassment training don't exist

>>84362058
>>These girls seem fertile, lets make this a nightmarish hell for them because Christianity or some shit.
It would make more sense for non-fertile women to be treated like trash.
The fertile ones would basically be married off to the high class.

>>84361871
untrue my dude I wasn't able to convince my wife to start a family until I was able to convince her that feminism is a meme and that going 6 figures into debt to become a barren history professor was a stupid fucking decision. Since she let that go she's been able to kick her antidepressants and has lost about 20lbs.

People out there are really planning their lives around this failure of an ideology.

>>84361871
Nope, it's ingrained everywhere now. Get out from under that rock.

>>84349669
>immediately dissect it and point out how absurd it is
Dissect it and point out how absurd it is for us.

>come up with a much better take on the idea and explain it over the next 10 minutes
Explain us said idea.

>>84354446
>burning witches was a bad thing
We have witches today. They're called "feminists". We'd be much better off if we fried a few of them.
>inquisition
didn't happen as a result of the Bible and had no Biblical justification. It was the Catholics being their usual cunt selves and making a bunch of shit up so they could have more power.

>>84362466
Before: No MP5s
After: MP5s
Dunno man, if I was a woman I'd be digging the "after"....

>>84363397
read the thread fag

>>84352811
See >>84364271

>>84349669
>>84350411
Now that the dust has settled, was it autism?

>>84364618
yeah but he wasn't wrong

>>84353995
>Don't you know that atheist regimes have historically been some of the most oppressive on Earth?
Do you think newfags from YouTube that parrot what their favorite atheicuck YouTuber would ever care to learn shit like this?
They are mostly even bigger losers than half the retards at /r9k/, most are stll mad mommy took them to church rather than let them play a another commodore 64 Atarishit-tier game

>>84349669
I've never heard of that but just by that image and woman's reaction I can already tell it's trash, basically everything created by/for women is trash though, to be fair

I feel like there's no way to criticize this show or say that it's bad without coming off as ridiculously sexist or ignorant, but fuck that, this show is boring as fuck and severely pretentious. They just show a women being unfairly tortured for 10 episodes and you're supposed to be like SO BRAVE GIRL POWER DOWN WITH THE PATRIARCHY unfortunately for this show, they never actually explained in acceptable detail how America got to this state. There's vague things about infertility and wars but it is never actually explained. Granted, the world could possibly get to this state at some point, but avoiding the whole thing is just shitty writing and fuck this show. It's boring as fuck. It's just Offred looking sad and getting raped and then becoming HOPEFUL HOORAY there's some HOPE and then having that hoped dashed and then whatever. It's so fucking stupid. I hate this show.

>>84365059
>Ridiculously sexist or Ignorant

It wouldn't be. It's the fact that everyone believes that it's standing for feminism that makes them also believe that any criticism of it is sexist or ignorant.

The way people work(mainly women, but now more men are doing it) now in days is short and sweet, all down to the meme surrounding something and not the merit of it's contents.

Because sensationalists say it's powerful, it thus becomes powerful. Nothing is looked at through substance, just simple gossip surrounding the thing.

>>84350295
>>>/r/eddit

File: overtime.jpg (5KB, 250x224px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 250x224px

>>84353883
It looked like a.real gun from a distance, and he pointed it at the cop. The kid asked for it. When cops leave their families in the morning to go to work, they expect to return home.

>Shooting to incapacitate is a meme

https://youtu.be/yfi3Ndh3n-g

>>84350063

>nightmarish plight of women

top jej

women would enjoy a society like this and be better off within one. Women aren't actually completely sentient like most men want to hope.

File: completeIdiocy.jpg (114KB, 688x960px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 688x960px

>my genitals were mutilated in real life at birth

>make a 10 episode oppression porn series so bitches can bitch about fictional genital mutilation

honestly feminist deserve this kind of society, because they won't know how good they have it until you take it away.

>>84349669
I haven't read the book. But I find it hard to believe that in a society that's short on population, there's no meaningful work these women could be doing in between their breeding sessions. Surely there must be some trade they could learn that wouldn't damage their fertility.

>>84367411
but anon, the patriarchal shitlords don't want womyn to have the honour of shitty gruntwork, they just want to bust a nut in them once in a while, feed, clothe and house them and let them relax while they go through the oh so difficult process of childbirth
it's not like these womyn are lazy and looking for an excuse not to have to work while simultaneously being able to whine about being oppressed, perish the thought

Quick,
Invited girl i like over to watch a film or two.
Any advice, was thinking black dynamite

This thread is where the libcucks have been for the past 4 hours huh.

>>84350411
>>84362718
Your version makes more sense, you were only shat on for bringing up Islam and what's even worse, you dared to bring up men.

File: 1495197069433.png (499KB, 720x579px) Image search: [Google]

499KB, 720x579px

my problem is how did those fuccbois stage a military/para-millitary coup in the US of all places without getting quickly defeated by the US forces not involved in their christcuckery? I mean we know the US survives as a nation state at war with JesusLand so how the fuck did the side with every military advantage get rekt

Blessed be the fruit.

>>84349669
>didn't even know it was a book
>I c-came up with a better idea I swear

>>84351653
>science has proved the absence of a deity in the post-war period.

>>84350063
Is that what the show is about? The premise in the books is entirely different, I was sure the oppression (which is felt by both genders) was caused by feminists.

>>84369676
>anyone on /tv/, sorry, /pol/
>reading books
Kek

>>84357738
this
that actress is a god-send, I like late blooming talents such as hers

File: 1483185853659.png (313KB, 429x471px) Image search: [Google]

313KB, 429x471px

>>84349669
>letting canadians write anything

You can tell this was written by a woman because all the ones being fucked are above 18

>>84349876
Lol the bitch writes articles for Costco magazine now lmao

Well, I am late to the thread here, but I was under the impression that Atwood wrote the book to help give Westerners an empathetic insight into what happened in Iran, when they went from a free, liberal society to a repressive Sharia regime.

I have never read it myself though, but my brother who has told me that is has more than a few flaws as a story and as a book. Just my two cents.

>>84349669
I don't see anything obnoxious about what you described yourself doing.

>>84351747
Because the US is much more Christian than it is Islamic. And writing a story about an Islamic country turning into a misogynist dystopia wouldn't have quite so much impact because it wouldn't involve the country changing that much, or at all.

>>84350143
>It's fairly unthinkable for the US to adopt Sharia law overnight, yes.
Americans are so stupid on average, and there are so many Christcucks in America, that I could easily imagine the US becoming a misogynist dystopia IF the economy completely collapsed or some other huge disaster took place. Unfortunately, I fear that much of our civility would vanish if our relatively high living standards collapsed.

>>84362389
>whenever an abortion is performed
I think that modern civilization requires people to be able to decide not to carry other people inside of their own bodies for nine months against their will. That's not feminist, it's just the right way to structure law. If you make abortion illegal you're imposing a form of slavery on those humans who are capable of becoming pregnant.

>>84373149
You know how you can decide to not carry another human being inside you for nine months? Don't have sex.
>It's slavery to not murder helpless people!
give us all a break

Fuck /tv/ this show is fucking beautiful.

>>84372686
The book is a cautionary tale on both radical Islam and radical puritanism. I think the show does a good job of displaying that. People forget that religions borrow from each other, I wouldn't be surprised if radical puritanism had a comeback with some influences from Salafi Islam.

>>84354260
>Christianity, even at it's worst, was never Sharia tier.
lol have you ever heard of the LRA or Cromwell?

>>84351278
So Paul is God? Do some research before you copy and paste off a fedora site.

>>84350411
So, also only hearing the concept second hand.

But basically, all of the draconian shit in the bible about monogamy and a woman's purpose as a baby-making machine are all byproducts of an era where, due to realistic survival concerns and infant mortality rates and food availability and need to avoid inbreeding, those values were crucial to stabilizing communities.

It's hardly far fetched to think that these values would assert themselves if a similarly dire circumstance arose, which it sounds like the book/series is portraying.

>most fertile men would be high class with their own harem
Eh, not really, one fertile guy could inseminate the entire population with one ejaculation so you would definitely expect there to be a significant skew towards fertile/infertile females' statuses being more affected than males'.

>>84350618
I've only read the Maddaddam trilogy but it was anything but boring or stupid, it was more accurately called spec fi than sci fi, and would you care to justify your bullshit rhetoric?