![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I started this deconstruction with a side-project of examining ways that things would be different if the diverging timeline didn't happen during the 80s, when this book was written, but instead now. This chapter is the reason why, or at least a concept I now know was in this specific chapter.
Most of this chapter is flashback to an event in Offred's childhood in America. Her feminist mother took her to a public burning of pornography. She was even given a magazine to throw into the fire, but was too young to know what the pictures were and letting her actually see the pictures was a mistake quickly remedied. But, it was an incident of what was, at the time of the writing, a point of agreement between two unlikely allies.
One ally was, of course, the feminists. They (not all, of course) viewed pornography as essentially disrespectful and objectifying of women. It's worthy of note that they weren't as far off as all that. The culture at the time treated men as default (more so than today, I mean) and treated men as the only consumers of pornography. So, all pornography being built upon fantasy, the fantasies were aimed to men and, yes, were objectifying of women. More on this in a bit.
The other ally was conservative Christians. They viewed pornography as immoral sex, at least akin to premarital or extramarital sex. Or at least that was the stated reason. I'm of a less generous frame of mind when it comes to giving them the presumption of good faith as I've experience with a great deal of bad faith coming from those who both claim ownership of and then defend "the faith".
( Read more... )
Most of this chapter is flashback to an event in Offred's childhood in America. Her feminist mother took her to a public burning of pornography. She was even given a magazine to throw into the fire, but was too young to know what the pictures were and letting her actually see the pictures was a mistake quickly remedied. But, it was an incident of what was, at the time of the writing, a point of agreement between two unlikely allies.
One ally was, of course, the feminists. They (not all, of course) viewed pornography as essentially disrespectful and objectifying of women. It's worthy of note that they weren't as far off as all that. The culture at the time treated men as default (more so than today, I mean) and treated men as the only consumers of pornography. So, all pornography being built upon fantasy, the fantasies were aimed to men and, yes, were objectifying of women. More on this in a bit.
The other ally was conservative Christians. They viewed pornography as immoral sex, at least akin to premarital or extramarital sex. Or at least that was the stated reason. I'm of a less generous frame of mind when it comes to giving them the presumption of good faith as I've experience with a great deal of bad faith coming from those who both claim ownership of and then defend "the faith".
( Read more... )
