Tuesday, February 8, 2011
Discussion Post 3: History of Oppression
Ann Cudd discusses in the first seven pages of our packet the historical evolution of the term "oppression", starting with Plato and Aristotle and moving to the 18th century Enlightenment writers of Hobbes, Rousseau, and Locke, the 19th century conceptual shifts in thinking, John Stuart Mill's The Subjugation of Women, and 20th century ideologies such as by Mary Wollenstonecraft and Simone De Beauvior regarding women's oppression and Hume's psychological studies. Which of the historical movements or writings do you believe to be the most influential in the understanding of oppression, particularly as it relates to The Handmaid's Tale, and why? Be sure to use quotes from either the packet or the novel.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
An obvious idea that justified oppression was religion and traditions in the article. Religion is usually taught over time, "That is, we learn as small children when we are not in a position to question them...". It seems to be one of the easier justifications but looking on the opposite side of why people allow it was more pyschological. Humans naturally want to be involved with others so in a way they allow themselves to be oppressed so they have interaction. The Handmaid's Tale comes as a shock because Offred hasn't grown up in such a radical religion she is forced into now. In the book her mother looked down on sex(when her mother burned porn with her friends) but as Offred grew older she established her own beliefs on life.
ReplyDeleteFear seems to play a big role in opression. John Stuart Mills idea of oppression was that women would easily give into being oppressed. “Oppressors create shortcoming and faults in their victims through a combination of force, terror, and unequal opprtunity to develop their talents,” (Mill 1988, esp. ch. 2) . Like in The Handmaid’s Tale, the city of Gilead created a sense of fear for the people by showing them that if they disobeyed the rules they will be hung. The Wall symbolizes a trademark of fear for the people of Gilead and this fear overrules them. While Offred wants to escape the fear of getting caught is stopping her.
ReplyDeleteI believe that religion plays a huge role in oppression. "Religion not only helps to make oppression acceptable to both the oppressed and the oppressors group, in some cases it constitutes oppression by aligning ones social group with the sacred and another with the profane". The Handmaid's Tale and religion go hand in hand. In the old church the priest was the high power in a community while women in the church who were unmarried usually became nuns who were forced to give up their worldly pocessions and take a vow of poverty. While those that were married were to serve their husbands and have as many children as the lord would bless them with. Which is not that different than in Tha Handmaid's Tale. You do what you know because you don't know the unknown.
ReplyDeleteWhile reading it seems to me that women play a major part in oppression. "Mill upholds the traditional division of sex roles in the family, believing that women will freely choose the domestic life of housewife and mother."In the Handmaid's Tale the women are just like housewives. The women have to serve and do what is told. They don't get the option of being a housewife or mother because, they are in a way forced to already be both.
ReplyDeleteFrom the readings i found that religon played a major role in oppression."Religon is an important force for constructing and justifying family life and the roles of women and men within the family." (170) In the book the "Handmaid's Tale" the commander and his wife as well as the household servants all come together to pray as a group. In Christianity when married a woman has vow to honor and obey her husband, meaning follow him and standby his decisions. The ceremony can not start until the Commander arrives because he is the man of the house and he is who the family looks to.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the pamphlet on oppression I feel that it was defined in previous centuries based on a lot of single opinions, but now has developed to a more common idea of the concept. The 20th century seems to have been the first century to include psychological damage as an issue of oppression and that seems to really tie into the Handmaid’s Tale the most. All of the women don’t want to be where they are and not just physically but mentally they are “losing their mind” so to speak because it just has become routine and the memories from their past are things they try to hope for now in the future. Political, social, economic, and psychological influences are all combined in the 20th century as major issues of oppression. Hegel states “oppression can have significant psychological effects both on individuals and on the oppressed groups.” As I stated previous, in the Handmaid’s Tale, each woman suffers from a loss of individuality while the women as a whole completely lack any privileges and rights. As readers we only know how Offred really feels about it all and relates to her past life, but I’m sure it’s safe to make the assumption that all the other women have similar thoughts and feelings. Just like the historical development of oppression, oppression progresses in the Handmaid’s Tale, much more quickly. In another flashback Offred states “we are not each other’s anymore, Instead, I am his” (182). Not only is this the first time statements similar to this have been made, of not having freedom or individuality anymore, but the fact that they are “his”, just as even their names represent. (Offred, Ofwarren, etc.)
ReplyDeleteWhile going over the article again, a particular observation on Mill's writing really stuck out in relation to The Handmaid's Tale. "Mill showed how the attitudes and desires of the oppressed are manipulated by the conditions of their oppression so that they appear voluntarily to accept their own oppression."(17) I found this to be extremely accurate in how the handmaids act in the book. Even though at first Offred was forced into this lifestyle, her attitude changes from one of freedom and individuality to one of survival. She follows the rules of Gilead without putting up a fight even though it’s not her ideal way of living.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the article again, it seems to me that women are mentioned a lot when it comes to opression. Hobbes and Rousseau think opression is "something of a puzzle." They state "How, if we are roughly equal in natural endowments, could one person allow herself to be dominated or enslaved by another". I believe this is very influential to opression and The Handmaid's Tale. The handmaid's are all dominated and enslaved by other people, even though we are all supposed to be equal.
ReplyDeleteAlthough Hobbes is not entirely accurate in his ideology of oppression, he says something that seems to resonate in "The Handmaid's Tale". Hobbes' belief was that "in the absence of a sovereign power to keep the peace, a situation he termed in the state of nautre, the rough equality of humans led to the war of all and against all..." This mindset is not actually true of oppression because many instances of oppression in the history of the world were the result of that "sovereign power." This belief, however, seems to be taken up by the rulers of Gilead in "The Handmaid's Tale". They set up a sovereign power in Gilead, but unlike Hobbes' argument, the people in Gilead ARE, in fact, oppressed.
ReplyDeleteUpon reading this article, the quote that stood out to me right off the bat was by Rousseu “oppression requires the ability for one person to do the work of two and the artifice of money…” This really stood out to me when trying to understand oppression in general as well as in The Handmaid’s Tale. Usually there is no justification for oppression isn’t provided it is simply inflicted upon the person and that happened in the novel as well. In the novel, the handmaids aren’t just doing the work of one other person, they are cycled from house to house to do the job of various wives to provide them with the children that they couldn’t produce on their own.
ReplyDeleteThe very first sentence of the article talks about how in the age of Plato and Aristotle it was believed that there was “a natural hierarchy of ability among humans that would justify such treatment as enslavement and denial of citizenship, fairness, or equal rights”. I believe that this traditional way of thinking is one of the most prominent reasons that oppression still exists today. There are people in this world who honestly believe themselves to be better and/or worth more than others, which they believe puts them higher in the hierarchy than others. If that were really the case, then oppression would be justified. Do we not use plants and animals for whatever use we want because we believe ourselves to be higher on the natural hierarchy? (Vegans and some vegetarians excluded) It is because some people believe that there is a hierarchy and that not all men (and women) are created equal that there is oppression, and this is seen in The Handmaid’s Tale in the treatment of the Unwomen, those who cannot bear children. They are outcasts of society because they have not given a child, believed to be lower down on the hierarchy than anyone else, and thus oppressed.
ReplyDeleteHobbes argues that a sovereign power overseeing the rights of humans will avoid oppression. However, we can see that this is not the case in the Handmaids Tale for there is a sovereign power in place that is specifically oppressing a certain group of individuals (women). Rousseau argues against Hobbes saying that in the absense of power there is no way for one to force his will on another, therefore eliminating the idea of oppression altogether. Locke also opposes Hobbes view by arguing that sovereign power is specifically the cause of oppression which is more related to what we see in the Handmaids Tale. However, Mill seems to provide the best definitions of oppression that relate to the Handmaids Tale. Mill discusses property laws and marriage laws as tools to "reduce womens ability to leave or negotiate greater freedom." He discusses how everything seems justified and we all adhear to the system because it appears to work. in the Handmaids Tale we know that Offred is aware that she is being oppressed so it isnt exaclty like Mill discribes, but he says that she appears voluntary to the oppression because her attidudes and desires are being manipulated. in the book this becomes apparent when Offred is struggling with her old memories and how she is trying to forget them and hold on to them at the same time. Fear is how her desires are being altered and fear is what the society she lives in is built around. Mill describes how girls are raised in a particular way to accept a subordanent role and in this book we have yet to see how children are raised because all we see is the first generation of women who still remember the old days. But it is imaginable that the chilren that grow up in this world will be raised to be compliant with the system.
ReplyDeletefreedom to and freedom from as offred incorperates in her everyday thinking... Being that God gave us all free will I believe the choice is always upon the individual... u can choose to or not to be oppressed. for example, if you are over weight if you stay that way and never doing anything about it you are oppressed... just my opinion!
ReplyDeleteMuch of the writing, in addition to pointing out the obvious role of religion as the major source of oppression discusses how the victims have "allowed" themselves to become oppressed. Thinking of the Spanish Inquisition, the Salem witch trials, the Chinese cultural revolution and invasion of Tibet, the nazi party, and any other of the thousands of historical and current events in which one group of people have oppressed another for their own gain, what kind of "choice" is oppression on one hand or death on the other? A statement on page 16 of the packet reads, "If it appears that someone is voluntarily submitting to oppression, then either the coercion is not apprent to the observer, or the victim voluntarily submits out of enforced ignorance... or she is not truly being wronged, but is seeking to fulfill herself in the best way she can." Is it a "choice", then, for women who are raised in a society where they can expect to have acid thrown in their faces for attempting to go to school, or who are stoned to death for spurning a man in which they have no interest, or beaten by their fathers for unveiling their faces even in their own homes? For early man, societies were nothing more than extended and often incestual families run by a patriarcal and usually physically overbearing individual. That person's ideals and desires became law, until he would be overthrown by another, often another strong male who was born in the same group and raised with the ideals of the former patriarch. The personal desires of one individual were passed down throughout the societal unit until they became ingrained in all subsequent members as "normal". Therefore, there is really no choice in the matter at all, without any education or enlightenment of anything different being an option. When the oppressive act occurs over a short period of time such as a political overtaking or social or religious uprising, the choice is usually conformity to whatever is the most powerful influence, life imprisonment, or death. The choice, then, is only for the agressors. Given human natural desire to gain control over anything possible (anyone own a "good dog" who obeys your every command, or have children who are punished for not "doing as they were told"?) it's hardly even so much a choice for the aggressors as it is an inate urge to follow one of the few "instincts" we as humans have.
ReplyDeleteAfter thoroughly studying the text provided in the article I feel that section 1.1 “’Oppression’ and modern liberalism” is the most influential in the understanding of oppression. Specifically, I am referring to the first paragraph where it talks about the philosophers Plato and Aristotle and how they believed in a “natural hierarchy among humans that would justify their treatment as enslavement and denial of citizenship, fairness, or equality of rights.” The thoughts generated by these men have been very influential over the years for more than just one reason. First off, the fact that these men were high ranking members of society made it so that people took their words to have a heavier weight than if they were said by just anyone; because of this people would have been more likely to take what they said as the absolute truth and more openly apply it to their lives. Another reason why I view Aristotle and Plato’s works as the most influential out of the various major movements in history is because their works are the furthest dating back. This is important because as the world’s population grew the ways of the old were passed on generation to generation, meaning that the once smaller population of people that believed the oppressive ways or Aristotle and Plato have grown to many more people over the ages through the exponential growth of the human race over the last 2,400 years.
ReplyDeleteRousseau discusses the idea that oppression can be slowly accepted by society when he states, "Oppression then becomes stable and accepted by the institution of laws, "it derives its force and growth from the development of our faculties and the progress of the human mind, and eventually becomes stable and legitimate through the establishment of property and laws." In The Handmaid's Tale, it talks about this very point when Offred recalls one of the Aunts telling the handmaids that it is the hardest for them because they are the first generation; for the ones after they will accept it as their role in life because they have known no other way. I think this is a very valid point. Oppression can begin by force, but is gradually accepted by society as the generations go by and children learn that this is the accepted way of life, and know no other way.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Mill’s idea of denial and of the oppression of women to be the most influential: his theory was pretty radical in his time because no one had ever thought before about gender differences. According to Mill, “oppressors created (actual and alleged) shortcomings and faults in their victims through a combination of for ce, terror, and unequal opportunity to develop their talents.” This directly pertains to women in general and those in The Handmaid’s Tale because women are deliberately kept undereducated in order for men to maintain their control. Because they are unable to read, have little access to news in the outside world, and don’t even have their own sense of identity, the women in Gildead are kept under control. This not only applies to women but to other minorities and oppressed around the globe. For instance, slavery was a common occurrence in the United States because for so many years, slaves were not even counted as full human beings (according to the Constitution). Thus, slaves were not allowed education and remained in the bottom of the social hierarchy. This form of oppression, that is, deliberately keeping the underprivileged at their level and limiting their opportunities in the outside world, is the only way to create the vicious cycle of oppression.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete