The rest of the men get to have wives. They are called econowives. They are women who can’t have children but haven’t “broken the law”, so they are not sent away to clean up toxic crap. Not much is said about them in the book. I’m sure the series will have to flesh out more of what their situation is.

@nerico922 said:

The rest of the men get to have wives. They are called econowives. They are women who can’t have children but haven’t “broken the law”, so they are not sent away to clean up toxic crap. Not much is said about them in the book. I’m sure the series will have to flesh out more of what their situation is.

Oh. So what's stopping these women from leaving? I mean if she runs away and isn't caught do the guys apply for a new woman? I think the show needs to do a better job of establishing how this society works.

Wouldn't it make sense to harvest fertile womens eggs and use other women as surrogates? I dunno, I just feel like Gilead is a society that would be very easy to collapse once they define how it actually works unless the bulk of women in the society actually like their new situation.

The male leaders would certainly reject any other form of conception due to their religious beliefs. and they reject science. 0mar and his wife were econovists.

please understand this is a work of fiction not real life ...tho it could be.

cswood--

As nerico922 said, some men do get "econowives".

I have not seen this series, only read the book (and saw the 1990 film with Robert Duvall and Natasha Richardson), but in the book, younger men-- soldiers --do get a chance to be assigned a handmaid. There is a scene in the book where all these crying teenage girls (of about age 14) are weeping as they stand in line to be married to eagerly waiting young soldiers. Of course, it is not known at the time if they will turn out to be fertile; if they aren't, presumably they'd be reclassified as econowives, and either their husbands would keep them or the unfertile wives would be reassigned to other men while the soldiers would marry a new wife in the hopes that the new one would be fertile.

Also, in the book's postscript, Gilead indeed does not last very long; if I recall, it collapses about 20 years after its founding, its counterinsurgency operations against various resistance groups ending in failure. In its place are multiple new nations; the United States is never reestablished.

@northcoast said:

cswood--

As nerico922 said, some men do get "econowives".

I have not seen this series, only read the book (and saw the 1990 film with Robert Duvall and Natasha Richardson), but in the book, younger men-- soldiers --do get a chance to be assigned a handmaid. There is a scene in the book where all these crying teenage girls (of about age 14) are weeping as they stand in line to be married to eagerly waiting young soldiers. Of course, it is not known at the time if they will turn out to be fertile; if they aren't, presumably they'd be reclassified as econowives, and either their husbands would keep them or the unfertile wives would be reassigned to other men while the soldiers would marry a new wife in the hopes that the new one would be fertile.

Also, in the book's postscript, Gilead indeed does not last very long; if I recall, it collapses about 20 years after its founding, its counterinsurgency operations against various resistance groups ending in failure. In its place are multiple new nations; the United States is never reestablished.

Okay. I haven't read the book, saw the Natasha Richardson movie several years ago and barely remember it, and haven't been keeping up with season 2 and was mostly going off of season 1. I'm not at all surprised Gilead doesn't last in the book because even despite the lower class men getting access to women it still doesn't seem sustainable.

Unless the women allowed it to happen. Okay now I'm going into tinfoil hat territory, but it would be kind of twisted if a large number of women were fine with Gilead. They do address this a bit in the first season where one of the women who had been some kind of druggie/homeless person doesn't think the female subjugation isn't that bad compared to how awful her life used to be, but given the amount of things in the US if women collectively wanted to put up a fight with a enough sympathetic men they could.

Although I'm not a gun person this seems like a great ad for the NRA.

Elizabeth Moss portraying Offred giving birth, was so raw and visceral. What an amazing actress!

While I´m intrigued by the concept it seems like the show is really lacking in explaining a lot how the world works - and the book does it better. I started watching it a while back and now I'm on s01e07 and quite often I'm baffled by the actions of the society. I get it - it's fiction, but good fiction is based on probable outcome or some more-or-less sensible rules that led to that outcome…

After reading this thread I'm more inclined to read the book than continue with the series tbh.

@mechajutaro said:

Although I'm not a gun person this seems like a great ad for the NRA.

Firearms would be a necessity for the majority MALE army that would ultimately square off against Gilead and it's thugs

Yeah, I have to say as someone who doesn't own a gun and isn't planning on owning a gun, I am fully for people's right to have access to guns. In the UK people can't have guns and they are even taking people's knives. If there were some kind of war situation the UK citizens would be totally defenseless.

@cswood said:

Don't get me wrong, I think the premise of this story is interesting and, under the right conditions, doesn't seem completely implausible... until you think about it. This premise doesn't take into account how average men think.

Okay so ALL the women in Gilead are under lock and key. That means you've got half the population policing the other half. All the young attractive women are handmaids, we don't see any other women in regular society in Gilead. Any low-level guy who tries to sleep with the women are apparently killed.

So... what are the male soldiers policing Gilead getting out of this? Are we to believe the majority of men would go from a society where they could sleep with women or at the very least watch porn whenever they wanted to a society where only the elite get to have sex with women and without no easy access to porn? What are these men being paid with? Money? To spend on what? Men generally achieve wealth and status to attract a mate. Take that away and what's the point? They can't even lose themselves in video games or media anymore because the society forbids it.

I think it stands to reason that Gilead would never last under these conditions. Most guys would simply defect to Canada or Mexico where they can get with a woman thereby leaving Gilead so undermanned their society would collapse. There is simply nothing in it for your average man.

Not sure what your basic argument is. Is it that such a society will be impossible to maintain and therefore cannot exist because young men get horny? We have only to look at present day societies like that of Saudi Arabia to realize that a Gilead is IMMINENTLY POSSIBLE. The point of the show or the book is not to PROVE to naysayers like yourself that such human societies are possible but to examine what the repercussions of their existing would be. BESIDES, if you watch the show or read the book properly you will realize that it doesn't take EVERYONE to be a card carrying devotees of a philosophy for that philosophy to succeed, it simply takes the COWARDICE of enough. There are PLENTY of characters in the show who support the structure in Gilead who would argue they are TRYING to save lives or do their best. Commander Lawrence ( one of Gilead's architects) would argue that given the fertility problem he was trying to save humanity ; Aunt Lydia would claim that given the structure that exists she is trying to save the vulnerable young women. People find various ways to justify what they probably know is WRONG even OUTRAGEOUSLY OBJECTIONABLE.

You have only to look at the scores of so called 'honorable' Republicans who are SILENT in the face of the racism and xenophobia of their current leader. Even those who we know had previously criticized him for the exact same tendencies. You have ONLY to look at these people to realize that a GILEAD in the US today is NOT that much of an impossibility.

@Thespear said:

Not sure what your basic argument is. Is it that such a society will be impossible to maintain and therefore cannot exist A because young men get horny? We have only to look at present day societies like that of Saudi Arabia to realize that that Gilead is IMMINENTLY POSSIBLE. The point of the show or the book is not to PROVE to naysayers like yourself that such human societies are possible but to examine what the repercussions of their existing would be. BESIDES, if you watch the show or read the book properly you will realize that it doesn't take EVERYONE to be a card carrying devotees of a philosophy for that philosophy to succeed, it simply takes the COWARDICE of enough. There are PLENTY of characters in the show who support the structure in Gilead who would argue they are TRYING to save lives or do their best. Commander Lawrence ( one of Gilead's architects) would argue that given the fertility problem he was trying to save humanity ; Aunt Lydia would claim that given the structure that exists she is trying to save the vulnerable young women. People find various ways to justify what they probably know is WRONG even OUTRAGEOUSLY OBJECTIONABLE.

You can't really use Saudi Arabia as an example because in the world of THT they've gone from a society where women had rights to one where they suddenly no longer have rights by decree of the government. The vast majority of men in the US have wives, sisters, daughters, aunts, and of course mothers and grandmothers that would be negatively affected by this. The only radical factor is that only a select group of women can now have children and so the taking away of women's rights is justified by the desire to ensure the continuation of our species.

This may surprise you, but the main reason why a lot of men seek to have relationships with women and get married is to have a family and children to pass their genes on to. If only the top men in control have access to the fertile women then there is no motivation for the 90% or more of men to support this regime. I mean would you continue to show up to work if you knew all your money was going to your boss?

There is simply no incentive outside of the government killing you if you don't go along, and in the US there are so many guns in the hands of the citizens that this would be nearly impossible if even 20% of the men decided to not comply or fight back with nearly all of the women supporting them in order to get back their freedom.

I just don't see that many men having the incentive to stand by the Gilead government knowing their access to fertile women and ability to have families being nil. Put yourself in the mind of a man. What is the point of going to work, having a nice car, clothes, house, or job if you can't use all that stuff to attract a woman and have a family? There would be no point to anything.

That's the difference between THT and Saudia Arabia, the real life patriarchal societies tend to produce lots of children because that's a man's biological goal, to reproduce and have a family. Removing that aspect changes everything.

@Thespear said:

You have only to look at the scores of so called 'honorable' Republicans who are SILENT in the face of the racism and xenophobia of their current leader. Even those who we know had previously criticized him for the exact same tendencies. You have ONLY to look at these people to realize that a GILEAD in the US today is NOT that much of an impossibility.

I don't see what racism and xenophobia has to do with this, the world of THT is about men vs women. As far as I could tell as long as a woman was fertile her race wasn't important.

The connection between Gilead society and today's US society is NOT that the evils are exactly the same...NO! The similarity in the way people find reasons to support taking away some else's rights. In U.S. today it is the immigrant child at the border, in Gilead it is fertile women, who knows what it will be tomorrow? The book creates the fertility problem to illustrate a point. The same point could easily be made with the race issue, even though that is NOT relevant in the book.

Regarding your assertion that gun ownership will 'protect' the populace from tyranny, I think you are naive. Guns are useless without bullets and in a command society like Gilead, who do you think controls the factors of production. You see, initially it will be the VERY gun toting idiots who are currently ignoring the rights of others who will support the Gilead Dictator, because they THINK he is on their side. By the time the realize otherwise, it will be too late. Also, in the book and show there is another factor: the infertility of many women. That is what changes the US of today to something else. The problem is that once you have acquiesced to a dictator who flouts human rights and encourages xenophobia etc, you will be hard pressed to rise up against him when he comes for your gun!

The desire to procreate is a basic urge in humans but before that is a MORE basic one which is to survive. History is full with examples of where that survival instinct QUICKLY leads to widespread atrocities AND the widespread acceptance of those same atrocities. This is why there are STILL rules even to fighting wars! Today we have a society where NO ONE'S survival is threatened in the U.S. yet people are ready to allow basic rights to be trampled. What, in hell, do you think is going to happen when a REAL emergency occurs? When people are made to think their actual survival is at stake?

I mentioned Saudi because, not only are women's and minorities rights routinely squashed and people killed by extra judicial means but we ( the rest of the world) get along with them fine, business as usual. Just like Canada does in THT.

There will always be justifications, reasons why, arguments for ANY disastrous policy of governing theory you can think of. But TYRANNY is why the original colonists ran away from the King of England to create a society where no one would be above the law. To protect EVERYONE from tyranny. Don't tell me that a society that is currently looking the other way, will suddenly become 'woke' in a true emergency.

@Thespear said:

The connection between Gilead society and today's US society is NOT that the evils are exactly the same...NO! The similarity in the way people find reasons to support taking away some else's rights. In U.S. today it is the immigrant child at the border, in Gilead it is fertile women

"Immigrant child at the border" isn't the US's fault though, their parents made the choice to do so, and that kind of situation has been going on long before the current administration, it's just that no one cared until now. Are you telling me if a stranger with a kid showed up to your doorstep and demanded to stay with you you'd let them in? It's not even comparable to Gilead. Those immigrants actually had a choice.

Regarding your assertion that gun ownership will 'protect' the populace from tyranny, I think you are naive. Guns are useless without bullets and in a command society like Gilead, who do you think controls the factors of production.

You know you can make your own bullets, right? Besides, the vast majority of gun owners and gun distributors are not going to respond well to the government trying to take their guns or bullets and the companies making those guns and bullets are not going to like it either. Even in the face of mass shootings a large portion of the nation is still resisting passing any gun restricting laws because it's better to have access to guns then not have access to guns in the event of a government takeover like Gilead.

There was a movie from a few years ago called Bushwick where a group tried to take over the government by targeting a "gun free" zone in New York, but there were so many illegal guns on the street in the hands of citizens it became a war zone.

You see, initially it will be the VERY gun toting idiots who are currently ignoring the rights of others who will support the Gilead Dictator, because they THINK he is on their side. By the time the realize otherwise, it will be too late.

Based on what? Look I fully admit I don't know all the details of how the Gilead people were able to take over aside from assassinating the government leaders, but a coup is exactly what "gun toting idiots" fear will happen! And earlier you said Gilead wants to take their guns and ammo! I just don't think the gun toting idiots are as dumb as you think they are, in fact I gather they'd be the ones most likely to fight Gilead while the weak unarmed people will be the ones to either be killed or fall in line out of fear.

Also, in the book and show there is another factor: the infertility of many women. That is what changes the US of today to something else. The problem is that once you have acquiesced to a dictator who flouts human rights and encourages xenophobia etc, you will be hard pressed to rise up against him when he comes for your gun!

No that doesn't make sense largely because of the fertility issue. The only way a dictator has a chance of taking over is if the people are complacent. If people aren't having children, if they're not fearing for the protection of their family, what incentive do they have to go along with this dictatorship? Who exactly is Gilead being xenophobic against? Do you honestly think a well armed nation would stand by while terrorists kill elected officials and install themselves without the say so of the people?

Everything you are talking about is pure fantasy. Even if Gilead had control of the military that's less than 1% of the population. Even if Gilead were elected into office, in order to pass laws to take women's rights away they would need the support of the people and women are the majority of voters. It's impossible, unless you have the full unconditional support of every man in the country and that's unrealistic especially when 99% of those men are going to be denied access to fertile women to have a family with.

The fertility angle is the primary reason why Gilead wouldn't work or exist. Now take that out of the equation and there's a better chance, but you'd never get enough people to support a terrorist regime especially when it's reveled they want to take away your guns and horde all the women for themselves.

The desire to procreate is a basic urge in humans but before that is a MORE basic one which is to survive. History is full with examples of where that survival instinct QUICKLY leads to widespread atrocities AND the widespread acceptance of those same atrocities. This is why there are STILL rules even to fighting wars! Today we have a society where NO ONE'S survival is threatened in the U.S. yet people are ready to allow basic rights to be trampled. What, in hell, do you think is going to happen when a REAL emergency occurs? When people are made to think their actual survival is at stake?

The historical examples you cite didn't involve an infertility crisis. Granted THT was written a few decades ago when it may have been easier to accomplish these atrocities and takeovers without cell phone cameras and the instant information of the Internet, but I am talking about today.

And please elaborate on which basic rights that you feel are being trampled on, that's a very vague statement that could me anything. I know there's ever growing mass censorship online, but again, the US is far better off than Europe right now where I feel a Gilead type situation is way more plausible.

I mentioned Saudi because, not only are women's and minorities rights routinely squashed and people killed by extra judicial means but we ( the rest of the world) get along with them fine, business as usual. Just like Canada does in THT.

Maybe I'm putting words in your mouth but when you say Saudi Arabia do you mean Muslims? All the things you are pointing out about Saudi Arabia basically comes down to their religious beliefs. THT would make way more sense if Gilead were basically Muslim extremists but we can't exactly make that comparison in 2019. The thing about Saudi Arabia is that a lot of the women there go along with what's happening. I'm sure many don't like it the way I don't like paying taxes, but again, those women end up having families and will put their children's well being before their own.

In a nation like Saudi Arabia a woman's sole purpose is to bear and raise children, if women can no longer produce children that nation would crumble and die.

There will always be justifications, reasons why, arguments for ANY disastrous policy of governing theory you can think of. But TYRANNY is why the original colonists ran away from the King of England to create a society where no one would be above the law. To protect EVERYONE from tyranny. Don't tell me that a society that is currently looking the other way, will suddenly become 'woke' in a true emergency.

And that's exactly why THT isn't plausible because unless you have a ton of man power people would just leave. As I mentioned before the military is less than 1% of the population, factor in the number of guns in the public's hands and the moment Gilead took over the government large swaths of the population would resist with violence, there would be riots, the economy would collapse, and people would flee much like we saw at the beginning of THT except there wouldn't be goons in black outfits chasing them because there wouldn't be enough man power to stop most people.

Gilead simply does not have the numbers, at least not as far as I can tell. I can only see a small group of extremists supporting Gilead, and unless they can Thanos snap all the guns out of citizen's hands they are going to get their asses kicked. Gilead would have a much better chance taking over Canada.

I just think of THT as science fiction. Gilead successfully gets control because reasons and all the men went along with it because Margaret Atwood has a low opinion of Western men and she thinks we'd all just go along with it because we're dumb. That makes the most sense to me.

As a refugee the child at the border is entitled to humane treatment. This is according to international treatise the US has signed. Even as illegal entrant, certain human right are due to them according to US laws. It's not about whose fault it is, it's ABOUT OUR constitution that guarantees EVERYONE certain basic human rights. If you can't see that, then it is your kind that will make Gilead possible here.

I have lived in and visited countries where human rights have been suspended. Where soldiers could stop you at any time to ask questions. Trust me, it is NOT fun. I hope you don't ever have to experience this to understand the helplessness of being in a society where the government can imprison you without due process. It may be Maria at the border today but next it could be Maggie at Wal-Mart.

When I say Saudi Arabia, I mean the country NOT a religion. Yes it is a Muslim country, but it I is its AUTHORITARIAN rulers that matter here. My point is even though we (The West) purport to support democracies and we condemn China, yet we get along fine with Saudi, even though they routinely KILL their own citizens, oppress women and their minorities.. This brand of hypocrisy will not go unnoticed in the event WE may EVER need others to stand for us.

In THT both the book and the show, it is the issue of infertility which sparks off the crises. This is what gives the government the EXCUSE to declare Martial Law, suspend habeas corpus etc. Once that happens your guns will not be of much use to you. In real life, it COULD be anything else a tyrannical President deems an emergency.

I doubt I will ever convince you that even a well armed populace cannot stand up to the armed FORCES, no matter how many such movies you have seen. I sincerely hope you NEVER have to find out exactly how right I am. The BEST defense is to make sure the CHECKS and BALANCES designed in our constitution are alive and well and that NOBODY'S civil right are infringed upon without a hue and cry from EVERYONE!!!!

It seems to me that on BOTH of those counts (ensuring checks and balances and protecting individuals basic human rights) the current US population is failing. By the time the tanks ard soldiers are rolled unto the streets to man roadblocks, it will be too LATE! Gilead will already be HERE!!!

@Thespear said:

As a refugee the child at the border is entitled to humane treatment. This is according to international treatise the US has signed. Even as illegal entrant, certain human right are due to them according to US laws. It's not about whose fault it is, it's ABOUT OUR constitution that guarantees EVERYONE certain basic human rights. If you can't see that, then it is your kind that will make Gilead possible here.

I disagree with your hypothesis. This border crisis is not the same as Gilead. Many of the pictures of "inhumane treatment" we've seen lately were taken under the previous Democratic administration but no one cared until the current Republican administration. I lot of people don't actually care about those border children, they just use them as a political hammer.

And I reiterate, the people attempting to illegally enter the US did it willingly, and in many cases passed other countries that might have taken them and their children in but wanted to come to the US specifically. There is a process people need to go through. Without the rule of law you have anarchy. This is exactly why a force like Gilead illegally taking control of the government without being voted in would not be tolerated.

And the more I think about it, Gilead would probably welcome illegal immigrants because that means potentially more fertile women coming into the country they could subjugate, but I don't understand how Gilead's economy works given they've locked up half of their work force and the entire country is going to die within a generation on two given their fertility rate is so low.

I have lived in and visited countries where human rights have been suspended. Where soldiers could stop you at any time to ask questions. Trust me, it is NOT fun. I hope you don't ever have to experience this to understand the helplessness of being in a society where the government can imprison you without due process. It may be Maria at the border today but next it could be Maggie at Wal-Mart.

I'm just curious, what were the gun laws like in those countries you visited?

When I say Saudi Arabia, I mean the country NOT a religion. Yes it is a Muslim country, but it I is its AUTHORITARIAN rulers that matter here. My point is even though we (The West) purport to support democracies and we condemn China, yet we get along fine with Saudi, even though they routinely KILL their own citizens, oppress women and their minorities.. This brand of hypocrisy will not go unnoticed in the event WE may EVER need others to stand for us.

But Saudi Arabia's authoritarianism and treatment of women is very much tied to the hip with their religious beliefs. Europe has had an influx if migrants that are largely Muslim and continue to practice their patriarchal control of women within their communities and the European governments don't do anything to stop them. And because Muslim women don't have rights or access to abortion their fertility rate is through the roof so in a few generations they'll outnumber the native Europeans, vote themselves into office, and most likely start changing laws to support their authoritative religious beliefs.

That is actually the realistic way a place like Gilead would come into being.

In THT both the book and the show, it is the issue of infertility which sparks off the crises. This is what gives the government the EXCUSE to declare Martial Law, suspend habeas corpus etc. Once that happens your guns will not be of much use to you. In real life, it COULD be anything else a tyrannical President deems an emergency.

I get that's what happens in the book but do you honestly think the people would go for that in real life? Children of Men was also a story about infertility and the people didn't automatically start taking women's rights in that story. It just doesn't make logical sense to me that the people would go along with it given that nearly every man in the US has a female relative in his life he would defend from such a law, not to mention we have more women than ever in political office. There are even women in charge of companies that manufacturer weapons.

As I said before, this would make way more sense if it took place in Canada or Europe where access to guns is very limited. An unarmed nation is a nation easily controlled.

I doubt I will ever convince you that even a well armed populace cannot stand up to the armed FORCES

No you are not going to convince me because I know the facts which I am sharing with you but you are choosing to ignore them. If you added up all the policemen and all the military, and assumed they were all in favor of Gilead, that's still less than 1% of the US population. There are something like 5 guns for every US citizen in America, I might be wrong on that exact number but there are more guns than people in the US.

So right off the bat you have half the population of women not going to be on board with Gilead, and a large portion of those women will have sons, husbands, fathers and boyfriends who are going to want to protect them because if any of those women are fertile the government is going to take them away. Factor in the number of guns the people have access to and Gilead is looking at a war they are seriously outnumbered for.

And if Gilead is willing to kill mass numbers of civilians then they are undoubtedly going to also kill fertile women in the process which negates their whole agenda of taking over the government to protect those fertile women.

THT is a interesting story but there is no logic behind how we get to a Gilead government within the United States. It simply would not work in the US, we have too many guns and too many people wary of government authoritarianism. The only way it could even possibly work is first repealing the 2nd amendment and forcibly taking people's guns and it's not the Republicans trying to do that.