Who is Responsible?

Last class someone posed the question "Is Gilead a matriarchal or patriarchal society?" The Handmaid's Tale has intrigued me with its ambiguous story line and at this point in the book (about half way) details are starting to become more clear. At first glance it appears as though men have total control. The women are divided into different positions, such as handmaids or wives, where they are forced to perform repetitive and tedious tasks. The author's use of colours, creates a vivid image of what Gilead is like; "The mirrors have been replaced here too by oblongs of dull grey metal..." The women are deprived of many comforts and Gilead appears sterile, almost factory-like. Women are there for the soul purposed of producing and raising (although we haven't witnessed this yet in the book) offspring. In the past chapters we just read we discover that the commanders have access to books, writing utensils, and even games. We also discover that they still have a hard time finding pleasure in these things. It appears as though the community is not benefitting anyone. By depriving women of happiness, they (whoever they are) are subsequently hurting the men. The commander complains about lacking companionship, and that his Wife no longer listens to him. I began to sympathise with the commander, a character that I originally disapproved of. Offred also discovers that the Wife has the final say about Offred's fate, if she is found secretly meeting the commander in his office. If this is a patriarchal society, I would assume that the commander has final say, but clearly women have more power than I originally believed. Particular statements that Aunt Lydia makes, referencing the irreparable status of women in the past, makes me believe that there are some women in Gilead who believe that this society is in favour of women, making room for the possibility that women are responsible for this atrocity. I can't comprehend how someone could actually preach the idea that liberation comes through denial of freedom. I understand that without options, there is no opportunity to make the wrong choice, but whose to say that the ultimatum that the women are given is the right choice?

I don't want my question to remain unanswered. I am desperate to find out how such a place came to be in order to reassure myself that something like this could never happen to me. I hope that as Offred attempts to bury her past, I will be able to uncover more details.

http://www.cartoonstock.com/directory/n/no_choice.asp

Generalizations

I think women these days sometimes shy away from their uniqueness, not wanting to bring attention to the fact that they are so different from men. The article If Men Could Menstruate highlighted the distinction between men and women. Light-hearted phrases such as, "Clearly, menstruation would become an enviable, worthy, masculine event," had most of the girls in the class laughing. Some of the males however, were offended by the author, Steinem's, generalizations and believed that her argument became increasingly less valid as she continued to poke fun at men. I think the article was more a call on women to take pride in their differences, than it was an attack on men. I think the reason Steinem referred to males as an example, was because men are known to have a way with spinning something negative into something positive. If this is the case, males should be flattered that Steinmen is encouraging women to be more like men. I believe that whoever has the power has the ability to change society's view on certain subjects. For example in the movie Mean Girls, "The Plastics" (a popular group of girls) can initiate any trend they want in their high school because people look up to them. Steinem wants women to take ownership and pride in the qualities that are uniquely female.

In the text Why I Want a Wife, the author uses a sarcastic tone to lampoon the stereotypical "duties of a Wife." I think the reason she capitalizes the word wife is because she views it as a classification that can overpower females. Certain phrases sound absurd in context; for example, "If, by chance, I find another person more suitable as a wife than the wife I already have, I want the liberty to replace my present wife with another one." However, this particular mindset does exist amongst men in some parts of the world. For example, in parts of the Middle East women are expected to maintain monogamous relationships while it is acceptable for men to have affairs and even multiple wives. On the other hand though, the author's generalizations are impersonal and stereotype men. The majority of husbands are not demeaning towards their wives and I could see how this article could be offensive. Although the course is called "women's literature," it is the first class that prompted me to approach and consider situations from both the male and female perspective.

http://www.tumblr.com/tagged/regina-george?before=1294352327

Toxic Relationships

This week I read multiple texts focused on toxic relationships between men and women.  To start - the men were always abusive towards the women. Whether it was blatant physical abuse or subtle oppression of their wives, the men never stopped to reflect on their detrimental behavior. In "A Jury of Her Peers" the main character, Ms. Wright, is being held for supposedly murdering her husband. Based on the evidence, I gathered that Ms. Wright was maltreated during her many years of marriage. Her husband took away from her everything that made her happy. I think it is reasonable to say that her husband "killed" her, before she actually killed him. My class started to debate whether or not the male investigators would pardon Ms. Wright if they understood the relationship she and her husband had. It got me thinking about whether or not ongoing mistreatment justifies murder. There are constantly stories in the news about abused women who are driven to hurt their husbands. I was curious as to whether or not they are found guilty in court. It turns out that "Battered person syndrome" is considered a valid testimony in court that is mainly used by women (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battered_woman_defense). Whether or not the claim will protect you - depends on how severe the case. In one particular case that I researched, a wife shot her tyrannical husband 11 times and was found not guilty of murder. I think it is better to try and get out of the marriage than stay around and stifle feelings that could eventually drive you to commit murder. I think the reason the main character Delia in "Sweat" doesn't blatantly murder her husband is because she tends to stand up to him. For example on page 19 she scolds him saying, "'Sykes, you quit grindin' dirt into these clothes!'" I think these small blows prevent Delia from bottling up all her anger and eventually exploding like Ms. Wright did. An interesting type of abuse that never really occurred to me, was men infantilizing women. This type of oppressive behavior is apparent in "The Yellow Wallpaper." The narrator's husband John calls his wife "blessed little goose," an endearing term that someone would usually say to their child or pet. I think John treats a grown woman like an infant because it gives him a sense of control over his wife. Later on page 30 he says "'What is it, little girl? Don't go walking about like that -- you'll get cold.'" His authority over her eventually drives her to insanity. In any situation it is easier to deny that something is wrong, but I think these types of toxic relationships stem from the women resisting to face their problems head on.