MovieChat Forums > The Handmaid's Tale (2017) Discussion > Odd fantasy book were christians act lik...

Odd fantasy book were christians act like muslims


I read the book as a teen. I loved dystopian stories, and didn't know a lot about religion. It seemed odd at the time the government was religious, when really I think it would be more like a communist/socialist nation. Look at China, they force women to have abortions because they believe in social programming, just like the left does.

I think what had the writer confused is her own stupidity. Yeah, fundamentalists have odd beliefs, just like people who think cows are holy, or that the dali lama really has lived bfore, or think muhammad flew to heaven on a magic flying donkey. But I've seen nothing in the chrisitan religion to show they would eventually turn to rape as a culture the way muslims have.

The author, being *beep* insane and ignorant, didn't care what women suffered through in islam, and instead just loathed her own culture. As such she saw white christians becoming monsters because... reasons.

Star Wars was more plausible then this story.

reply

I'm guessing you're Christian?

reply

Nope, I'm agnostic.

I'd say atheist but I find atheists to be mostly cowards, who only attack christians and sometimes jews but never muslims or buddists.

reply

Uh huh, sure, buddy.

reply

[deleted]

Too bad, if you don't believe in any gods you're an atheist, whether you think they're beneath you or not. Because that's literally the definition of the word.

reply

No, you're incredibly ignorant and obnoxious when you say this - "they believe in social programming, just like the left does."

There is nothing on the Left like FOX News, or any of the AM Right-Wing radio "PROGRAMMERS" ... and you need a good thrashing, or a better education.

reply

"There is nothing on the Left like FOX News"

Biggest joke i've ever heard. Regardless of what part of Fox News you're addressing, we could find countless counter examples from the likes of CNN, MSNBC, TIME, Newsweek, WaPo, NY Times, Buzzfeed, The Guardian.

Not to mention all the far left insanity being spouted out from college "professors", plus all the riots (yes, riots. Not "protests") from various far left organizations.

reply

I get it now, didn't and can't go to college, so you hate all professors and call them elitist leftist ... what a loser you are

reply

Not American, so HA! I just happen to read what's going on.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jun/21/johnny-eric-williams-trinity-college-professor-cal/
https://www.thecollegefix.com/post/32688/

reply

If you cannot make your own point succinctly don't point me to links to read. I am not your bloody student, and you are clearly no professor. The Washington Times is a well known right-wing rag ... it is hardly the Washington Post. IF you want to subscribe to the Moonie point of view you are welcome to, but don't point to it as an objective source of information.

--

Founded on May 17, 1982, by Sun Myung Moon, the Times was owned by News World Communications, an international media conglomerate associated with the Unification Church, until 2010, when Moon and a group of former executives purchased the paper. It is currently owned by diversified conglomerate Operations Holdings, which is a wholly owned subsidiary of the church.[6][7]

Political stance and content[edit]

Times dispenser
The Washington Times holds a conservative political stance.[72][73][74][75] The Washington Post reported, "The Times was established by Moon to combat communism and be a conservative alternative to what he perceived as the liberal leanings of The Washington Post. Since then, the paper has fought to prove its editorial independence, trying to demonstrate that it is neither a "Moonie paper" nor a booster of the political right but rather a fair and balanced reporter of the news."[12]

reply

What does any of that have to do with the argument? Never even heard of Washington Times

reply

Eric, I'm American and you are completely correct. It's kind of interesting how some people can selectively ignore certain truths.

reply

So you are so stupid as to post a link to a source you have no earthy idea about, and then blame me for educating your empty brain? Right.

reply

username checks out

reply

Nice argument.

reply

What are you, a fucking moron?!? Because that was a simple observation, and only the lowliest of piss-poor-personalities would even remotely think of it as an argument.

You're quite obviously a few steps below a cretin. Now, go find an argument to stir, peanut-head.

reply

An observation you thought was so good you responded to a post over 2 years old.

reply

You are very ignorant of what is going on in education. Granted this is in Australia, but I can guarantee you that the US has a similar majority % of left leaning teachers/professors in your education system.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1psjQ3TfEA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BwC3v49Xxx8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJv4QdPofxI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_1gdx4DKbk

reply

> You are very ignorant of what is going on in education.

That is an nasty, insulting comment. Just because you have seen a few You-Tube clips doesn't make you an expert in education, especially when they are Australian.

You seen to be totally lacking in understanding that while the rest of the world moves ahead in things like education, the USA is only concerned with creating the highest profits so as to make whatever field, be it health care, education, housing, etc, a rent-seeking haven for people with lots of capital. While the trend in most of the developed world is to make education better and cheaper, the US only cares about privatization and high profit margins for investors.

reply

I see that you get the bias in the production. I shall certainly give it a looksee when it is broadcast but concluded a long time ago that most Christian characters in Hollywood productions do not get an honest portrayal unless the movie is produces as a "Christian" movie. BTW contemporary Christian movies are getting better and better. However, as you mentioned, change Christian to Muslim and the movie was pretty accurate. With the PC culture in Hollywood today, it is almost not possible to have any negative portrayal of Muslims due to the blowback that they fear would happen.

We shall see what happens and "yes" I am a Christian who spent a lot of time in Fundamentalist Churches. They are nowhere near how they are portrayed in the media. It does not have a cult atmosphere as people are led to believe but just believe in taking their faith seriously and living it and mostly practicing live and let live. People can join and leave as they feel led with no retaliation. As I said, we shall see how this works out.

reply

I actually read the book. I read it after seeing a low budget but well done movie back in the 90s. I loved dystopian fiction and read it was most of the sci fi I read back then.

I know it's fiction and things aren't always going to be realistic. However nothing about the christian government seemed plausible. Most christians I knew were pretty decent and not liley to enslave a woman because of... reasons, nothing in the bible that I'm away of would support that.

Sure, there is the West Bapist Boro group who protest funerals but everything I see in the real world is they are despised by christians as well as anyone else. Sure, the bible is against gay sex, but the worst christians do is refuse to bake a cake for a gay wedding, while a muslim will shoot up a gay nightclub. I know there are christians who are crazy, there are on youtube. I would say if the average christian was as bad as the average muslim Europe and the US would be closer to the ME then what it is.

All of what we have today and enjoy in the modern world comes from countries with a christian background. I think their is some correlation, not that god favors christians, but maybe after reforms christians were able to

Wouldn't you think all religious gatherings are 'cult' like. It's a bunch of people with the same specific belief on one thing and think their faith is better then the other guys' faith. I assume anyone who goes to a place of worship takes their faith seriously. I assume a jew who goes to temple takes being more serious then the jew who eats pork and never goes to temple.

The funny thing is if you had a movie or show that showed an accurate portrayal of muhammad muslims would riot. He married a 6 year old and deflowered her when she was 9. I know the writers at Salon think this is normal, especially in this time period, but in todays culture it's considered sick. Muslims would riot. Meanwhile artists can do images of Jesus covered in feces and christians will be upset and maybe protest but they wouldn't kill anyone the way muslims do.

reply

Many Christian movies don't portray Christians fairly either. Glenn Beck thinks God's Not Dead makes them look terrible people, for instance. They are often too judgemental and arrogant in their beliefs.

reply

Well I don't know if you're trying to criticize Islam, make an apology for Christianity, or critique the book, but yes, it is a pretty wonky plot. And you're right, there never has been another slavery institution like the early caliphate, labor slavery or sexual slavery. Nothing at all. Full stop. And saying that is not some apologia for the Atlantic slave trade, but when we look at the records that exist (and the DNA evidence) the full scope of what the first few generations of the Muslim conquest did in the Middle East, especially to Persia, was beyond appalling. And that continued somewhat unabated for over a millennium, and even continued at a not-so-small scale in parts of the world well into the 20th Century and continues on some scale today (ISIS being the most well-known).

And you're right, there is this weird blind spot with the modern political left when it comes to Islam and these issues, but they'll fling all kinds of crap at Christians for even hinting at moderately conservative values. Now to be fair, there are some pretty bonkers Christian sects out there, especially in parts of the US, that do practice some form of sexual slavery, but they're so ridiculously small in number. Not that they should be ignored, but to use some wacky tiny Mormon cult out in the mountains as the yard stick by which we judge the average Christian is absurd. And I'm not a Christian, or religious, or even conservative. I'm just a guy trying to be fair and see the world as it is (as hopeless as that may be).

But as for the book, yeah, it's pretty far off from any real speculative fiction possibility. For one, you have this group able to stage some coup and yet immediately descends into stupidity? And even more dumb, we actually have a few examples of cultures where the reproductive females are small in number for whatever reason, mostly in Tibet and South America, and guess what all those cultures feature: a matriarchal system that practices polyandry (1 wife, many husbands) where the men have almost no property rights, because their genetic posterity can't be verified, and the women have to do basically all the child rearing for that same reason. It's almost as if people revere their mothers and give them a ton of power. Funny concept. And what's even worse about the book, besides being relentlessly depressing and boorish, is that it doesn't even really have an ending.

And to be fair to Atwood, I think 30 years ago she fell into some of those early tides of the beginnings of 3rd wave feminism like many of her peers, probably as a protest to that 80s wave of conservatism, but I think has walked back on some of it now after seeing how *beep* crazy some of this has all gone. But I also think she's more intelligent and sophisticated than many of her readers who don't seem to understand artistic license and exaggeration to make a point. I mean pro-life legislation is especially heinous to women's health, but let's not pin it on some invisible patriarchy Illuminati cabal where men simply oppress women "because".

reply

Muhammad actually warned Muslims that something like The IS and Al-Qaeda will start to appear when people start to forget and abandon Islam. Unfortunately it's not the first time in history either. The Islamic civilisation helped advanced culture and technology throughout the world, but they never should have switched from their knowledge-based governance to herditary monarchy so early in history.

reply

1. According to the Prophet's official biography he was IS and Al-Qaeda after 621AD

2. Most "Islamic advancements" were works of the conquered nations and slowly disappeared as the locals were converted. There were a few exceptions - usually related to some lapses in the strict obedience of Islamic laws and they always ended the same way: the true Muslims would come and slaughter the unworthy.

reply

Christians are very scientifically advanced in this story? That's not a new thing. Although there were many famous and influential medieval scientists who were Muslims, there were also Christian ones especially after the Renessaince help spread the knowledge discovered by the Muslims, Greeks and other throughout Europe.

As for the Extremist culture portrayed that is nothing new to Christianity either especially if you look at the Dark Ages in Europe and also the Crusades.

reply

Your utter ignorance of Islam, and the world around you generally, is the only possible basis for the moronic conclusions you've drawn about society.
You're so *beep* dumb that you can't see how this capitalist system has *beep* this country and the world way more than even the most backward Islamists could even dream...yet all you can find it in your pea brain to denounce is Muslims. 15 years of capitalist war under both Bush and Obama killed hundreds of thousands of people, and set off the worst refugee crisis of the new millennium, and yet this system still remains invisible to your dumb ass.
Intelligent, non-racist people have got to get our *beep* together immediately and stop dumb *beep* like brushfyr from becoming the shock troops of fascism under the Trump regime.

reply

Someone forgot their meds!

reply

Look at China, they force women to have abortions because they believe in social programming, just like the left does


Em China had a one child policy because of a serious over population problem. Everyone knows that except somehow you 










LOL you sadists https://youtu.be/6Zxy_dScjsM

reply

[deleted]

Well no actually... You Said

they force women to have abortions because they believe in social programming


So I pointed out to you the reason was not ''Social Programming'' but because of an overpopulation problem. If they didn't do that then the people would starve. The reason you gave is incorrect and made no sense at all.

Apart from that I do not understand what you're saying because you can't seem to write comprehensively.

reply

I don't think that the author has ever made a claim that ALL of the aspects of Gilead's society came from Christianity (although many did, historically)--only that they all came from real human history:

"I made a rule for myself: I would not include anything that human beings had not already done in some other place or time, or for which the technology did not already exist. I did not wish to be accused of dark, twisted inventions, or of misrepresenting the human potential for deplorable behaviour. The group-activated hangings, the tearing apart of human beings, the clothing specific to castes and classes, the forced childbearing and the appropriation of the results, the children stolen by regimes and placed for upbringing with high-ranking officials, the forbidding of literacy, the denial of property rights: all had precedents, and many were to be found not in other cultures and religions, but within western society, and within the "Christian" tradition, itself. (I enclose "Christian" in quotation marks, since I believe that much of the church's behaviour and doctrine during its two-millennia-long existence as a social and political organisation would have been abhorrent to the person after whom it is named.)"
--Margaret Atwood
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2012/jan/20/handmaids-tale-margaret-atwood

reply

Your ignorance of the reformation, the counter reformation, the witch hunts, the atrocities that happened during the crusades, the thirty years war where populations where terrorised, the inquisition, the effect of the treaty of Tordesilla and the papal bull that went with it causing not only Brazil to speak Portuguese but Portugal to be effectively master of Africa during the early 16th century so allowing it to dominate the slave trade, how the christian religion was used to pacify slaves and excuse theft, torture, rape and coercion etc is kind of telling. Hell the fourth crusade was meant to go to Jerusalem to free it from Islam, the army got to Venice and because an old blind man saw an opportunity he turned it against Constantinople using the excuse 'they aren't the same type of Christians as us.'

Christians and Western history isn't lilly white with a hint of vanilla. That isn't against white people that is just fact. Look up what a scold's bridle and the spanish donkey did to women during those times.

So yes there are aspects of the plot that are wonky, is there more problems with regards to women in other religions today - it can be argued yes. But the statement that Christianity is immune to batshit craziness compared to other religions then you are off the plot too. Also if it was set in a dystonia with Hinduism as the religion in question I'm betting you wouldn't have gotten into the book as much because you wouldn't have had as easy an understanding of the background systems.

reply