The Spinster

Your opening statement is a misrepresentation of what I posted. I find the introduction of this premise disingenuous, at best. I believe it has everything to do with the fact that they have suffered under a Totalitarian government. To not have the fact that they are victims of Gilead as a primary consideration in the examination of their actions is to deny the very reality of these character's experiences. These events/their choices are not occurring in a vacuum. Agreed. For the reasons I state above, this reality should not be divorced from the topic at hand. Considering your own premise, I wonder why not? How is it they hold any less of the "blame" you lay at the feet of June? They were all active participants in the ordeal. Each one made her own choice in that moment. None of these women were without their own minds. They weren’t even “following orders”, which some would consider enough reason to dismiss the ownership of their actions, if not the outcome. Each Handmaid did her own threat assessment of the situation – each chose her chance at freedom. If you must “fault” one for the uncontrollable outcome of her choice – then logically you must fault each one for the uncontrollable outcome of their individual choices as well. (If you read a post I made earlier, I do address false/limited choices, so I will not rewrite all that). At this point I wish to re-introduce the idea that these decisions are not happening in a vacuum. Things are already "ending badly" for the women of Gilead. Doesn’t June have the right (one might even argue the responsibility) to attempt an escape from that van for her own individual freedom? I say yes. Does she owe the other Handmaids her own continued enslavement? I don’t think she does. It is 100% her divine right to escape at any and every opportunity she chooses. I have a concern with this characterization, as I think it is meant to diminish her as a leader. Was she voted in to office? No. But the very fact that people do follow her leadership is a vote of sorts. Their decision to participate (or not participate) in her plans is a vote of sorts and does result in her being a leader. She rose to the position because her leadership skills best meet the task at hand. Serena and June both play chess while everyone else is playing checkers. Aunt Lydia is sneaky and plays a strong game, but she isn’t as intelligent as June or Serena. All of that to say, June’s position of leadership is a direct result of her leadership skills – not a self-appointed position in the way it is implied in your statement. However, I will address the idea that as a leader: Taking responsibility for a mission is one thing, but being blamed ("taking the blame") for an outcome beyond one’s control is something else. I am not a big fan of survivor’s guilt, no matter how it is packaged, projected, or required of someone else. I think it encompasses it's own form of dishonesty that does not serve any institution or individual well. There is nothing noble or just about it. June comes face to face with it after her capture. When she is in the cell talking with Aunt Lydia, Aunt Lydia tells her of the losses suffered and how it's all June's fault. June has faced those demons before the van escape/train event. --- A few more thoughts of mine: 1. Blame implies fault; guilt. I argue that no, there is no blame/fault/guilt to be placed on June for the deaths of those Handmaids. This does not mean that June bears no responsibility for her actions (as an individual or in her position of leadership). But responsibility for her choices and blame for the outcome are two different things. 2. I wonder if June had been killed by the train, would June then be praised for her sacrifice and bravery? How much does the fact that she is one of the Survivors play into targeting her for blame? Food for thought I want to ponder further. 3. Additionally, and perhaps most importantly, your reasoning is in alignment with the psychology Aunt Lydia represents. Example: Aunt Lydia loves to "hold the Handmaids accountable". If they had only not done xyz , these bad things would not have happened. We see the same reasoning in your statement, as I understand it. It’s far too simplistic: Those women got hit by train and died. Whose fault is it? Her fault. The driver shot and killed them. Whose fault is it? Her Fault. To me, this is the insidious message that makes Gilead possible. Aunt Lydia's voice represents this. "Such a selfish girl," says she. "If June weren't so careless and selfish with her power, they would all be alive. See how bad June was to exercise her power of leadership? See how dangerous these escape attempts are, June? People get hurt because of you, June.” so, whose fault is people died? It's not Aunt Lydia's fault... It's HER FAULT. It's not the Driver's fault... It's HER FAULT. If only she just had not taken that opportunity to escape... HER FAULT. It’s not the fault of the people or system that enslaved her... It’s HER FAULT Gilead represents a system of Power Over, it is never about true accountability. The purpose of guilt and blame can be used to discredit the victim/rebel publicly. It can also be used more intimately to disarm the activist/rebel/survivor/leader psychologically and reassert power over her (in this case). Neither of these are the big picture purpose, though it is played out in somewhat small and intimate ways. The big picture purpose of blaming a leader like June is it helps preserve the status quo of the Gilead system, overall. There is never going to be a time when rebelling against the Totalitarian system does not come at a price. This idea of a rebellion that will not have dire consequences is an illusion. The use of guilt and shame/blame for consequences beyond one's control are merely more psychological tactics used to reestablish control over the victim/oppressed. It is a crafty manipulation – one of the more insidious tools of oppression and very difficult to recognize because it is so normalized and internalized (and not just in fictional Gilead). In conclusion: So very sad and sorrowful those women were killed. Sympathy for the outcome they suffered? Yes. But place the blame of their deaths on June? NOT. HER. FAULT.

I want to address absolutely everything you say here - what a great response! I understand the place of viewing this as personal responsibility alone, especially when one is grappling with all the complexity of the dynamics at play. If you revisit my post in it's entirety you will see: False. It was, in fact, Gilead's fault. Had Gilead not enslaved these women, they would not have been in the van to begin with. June is responsible for her response in the sense that she chooses what she deems is the best of nothing but bad choices. However, it is the oppressor who has made the situation. The FAULT of the deaths lie with Gilead. I find your line of reasoning a very intelligent, elaborate journey that takes us to a blame-the-victim outcome. I tried to acknowledged that in the emboldened statement above. It does bear a discussion all it's own and surely cannot be fully addressed in a simple forum such as this. But, I love that we are talking about it nonetheless! So, I believe my argument is summed up with these observances 1. There is an illusion of freedom of choice in the Handmaid's being able to create a free solution/reaction to their circumstances. They are an enslaved people. I believe the moment June holds up the whistle or gun as a presenting a (false) freedom of choice for the Commander. It sums up the mindf*** that June has had to contend with all along. The irony of it was palpable. The illusion of choice is one of the things that allows Gilead to survive. Never mind that there is no real freedom in the "choices" being offered. Only the infrequent opportunity to choose the best of only bad options. There is an illusion of choice, but all roads lead to Hell, so to speak. 2. There is a false equivalency being applied to the aggressive acts (sometimes passive-aggressive, but aggressive nonetheless) performed by those in power and those trying to escape and overcome the Oppressors and/or The Gilead regime specifically. If we set up an analogy to a domestic violence situation, when an abused woman hits her abuser back, is she also abusive? I believe most of us would agree it is self defense. If she takes joy in fighting back, is it no longer self defense? If it is strategic in it's planning (the Jezebel's poisonings for example) is it no longer self defense? (... An aside to let you know I am not ignoring your statement regarding Emily and the Wife, specifically... I tried to re-watch the episode but I cannot get to it on Hulu any longer. Off hand, I do recall the Wife espousing the brainwashed philosophy of Gilead. I remember looking at it more as Emily removing a source of verbal and psychological torture, than the killing of an innocent. On a more visceral plane, I was left with thinking "Damn. We can't even get away from your mindf****ing way out here in The Colonies?! You've got to go." And I was glad Emily took her out. All of that to say I want to more adequately address your argument's point regarding Emily and the Wife specifically in a more philosophical/big picture way. I am going to research it more and will respond to it later.)

The battle is not the war. One may ask "What does winning look like?" Yes, Aunt Lydia and the driver survive. Yes, some handmaids lives are lost in their attempted escape. However, two handmaids survive and become powerful forces in their own right.

False. It was, in fact, Gilead's fault. Had Gilead not enslaved these women, they would not have been in the van to begin with. June is responsible for her response in the sense that she chooses what she deems is the best of nothing but bad choices. However, it is the oppressor who has made the situation. The FAULT of the deaths lie with Gilead. I find your line of reasoning a very intelligent, elaborate journey that takes us to a blame-the-victim outcome.

I would argue that that is exactly what war is. The act of killing the enemy is tearing a body apart - whether with a bullet, a knife/sword, a bomb, a drone - or with your bare hands. It was both physical and psychological warfare. .

Fred turned Serena in for her part in that rape when he realized Serena had traded him/betrayed him for her passage in to Canada to be with Nichole.

I keep wondering if Nick is also the real father of Serena's baby.

June smearing blood on baby Nichole,,, the Warrior returns to the cave and smears her child with the blood of the dragon she has slain. Celebratory and unapologetic. This was my favorite moment. She is now beyond Victim, beyond Survivor - she has become a Warrior Woman. Luke's grief and horror: he still does not grasp what is at stake, not truly. She represented his old, easy life and wants her back in that with him to complete the picture. My heart broke for him. He isn't bad for wanting what was, but he remains immensely naive ( and I must admit I feel some resentment towards his character that he has this luxury. I find it cowardly. And intellectually and emotionally dishonest of him. At some point here it is a willful blindness, and I think we've just about reached it). Their mutual recognition that there is no place in Canada (in all that Canada represents) for her. - or intensely angry women at all, for that matter. All that rage just makes everyone so uncomfortable. They are comfortable with the traumatized victims that process their experiences neatly, nicely, - just tell your story in therapy, tell your story in court, just testify one more time for the camera. Be grateful. Be quietly grateful. Be nice. You could fly to Geneva next. Aren't you grateful? Luke says we all need to be grateful and focus on that. Never mind that the Dragon is soon to be free to continue his systematic ravaging of all that is good. Can't you just be grateful??? (Message: The problem is your ingratitude, June - not the dragon!) Her later musing on the porch about what a "good Mother" would do - grieving the loss of that old role not being enough to truly protect her child or herself. Realizing it never really was enough. The pain of it -the courage of facing the truth of it. So brave. June's action said "I am the Warrior Mother - I go out, I lay the trap, I hunt the Dragon and I kill the Dragon. One less dragon out there - it's a good day. Now I will show my daughter that the love of a Mother has many faces." And I love her for her it.

I agree. He really is about as exciting as watching paint dry - a perfect example of a cowardly bureaucrat. He even whined about his safety when meeting with Commander Lawrence. I don't get the attraction everyone is talking about between him and Serena. The man is unbearably dull. Perhaps he supposed to be void of any fire in his belly. But to what purpose?

I wonder if they are going to show the experience/events through the eyes of Hannah/the children. Her eyes are always so void/vacant/joyless/expressionless. I would like to know how the children in Gilead are coping. What are they told?