Hopkins 1

Tom Hopkins
Dr. Walker
Lit 530: Gender and Text
29th July 2022
The Handmaid’s Tale: Divide and Conquer

Patriarchal structures which prioritize masculinity and men over their binary

counterparts, femininity and women, exist, in part, due to a patriarchal hegemony which

taxonomizes certain gender performances within a hierarchy. In other words, the

dominant patriarchal culture, via patriarchal apparatuses like the state, family, and

church, embed a rigid gender and sexual hierarchy which is then reproduced and

perpetuated through performances which conform to depicted norms; deviations of such

performances are met with policing by others (Butler 20). This sexual and gender

hierarchy, which privileges masculinity and heteronormative sexuality as the norm,

portrays the ideal feminine performance as one that compliments ideal masculinity;

specifically, performances “emphasizing compliance, nurturance, and empathy as

womanly virtues” (Connell 188). As a result of patriarchal hegemony prioritizing

feminine performance as being merely a compliment to masculinity, patriarchal

structures and ideology are perpetuated through such reproductions. However, women

who subvert this expectation are met with policing, for society “regularly punish[es]

those who fail to do their gender right.” (Butler 224). The policing of women who fail to

perform as desired under the patriarchy can come from institutions, men, or other

women. The act of women who internalize patriarchal ideologies which prioritize

emphasized feminine performance and then punish other women for subverting such

performances is known as internalized misogyny. Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s

Tale reflects and criticizes the modes in which the patriarchy and its apparatuses
 Hopkins 2

implicitly employ women to police one another into performing emphasized feminine

gender roles which are limiting and serve their masculine counterparts, perpetuating the

patriarchy.

Atwood’s novel was written in 1985 after the Second Wave Feminist Movement

and during the Conservative Reagan administration, which had undone some of the

progress made by the earlier Feminist movement, such as defunding abortion clinics.

During this period, there was a rise of female anti-feminist groups who believed in

traditional, Christian, conservative values (Coste). This socio-political climate inspired

Atwood to write the novel which depicts a totalitarian, theocratic state which has

structured society around extremely rigid gender hierarchies, of which men are

positioned at the top, but women are further organized and mandated particular and

limiting roles. Within this fictional state, patriarchal state apparatuses embed the

theocratic, totalitarian government’s new ideology and, subsequently, women are shown

to criticize, judge, and police one another, exacerbating their alienation and diminishing

their power as a collective. More specifically, the state divides women into one of

several categories depending on their social status, loyalty to the party, and, importantly,

their ability to bear children, yet all are less privileged than men. The Wives, the highest

group of women on the social hierarchy, the domestic group known as Marthas, and the

Handmaids who must bear children for the powerful are all depicted as criticizing one

another instead of having gender solidarity.

However, Atwood does not simply depict internalized misogyny under this

dystopian and fictional state; in addition to doing this, Atwood uses the narrator’s

memories of the past in contemporary America to highlight the problem exists wherever
 Hopkins 3

there is a patriarchal hegemony. Through the application of a feminist lens specifically

concerned with evaluating the ways in which patriarchal apparatuses and ideology

taxonomize certain gender performances and alienate women as a result, the effect that

patriarchy has on the relationships and unification of women becomes more apparent. It

is through such taxonomies and alienation which causes women to police one another

and perpetuate divisions, subsequently limiting their power and reinforcing the

patriarchy.

Patriarchy, in its simplest definition, is the set of structures which prioritize men

and masculinity. The root of the term “Pater” is Latin for “father,” and so any structure,

such as the family, which positions men as the authority is patriarchal, like the

normative family wherein the husband/father is seen as the breadwinner and decision

maker. This extends to businesses, governments, and any structure which values men

and masculinity over women and femininity. In the wake of Foucault’s theories on

power, modern feminists posit that contemporary patriarchy “operates in a capillary

fashion throughout the social body [and that] it is best grasped in its concrete and local

effects and in the everyday practices which sustain and reproduce power relations”

(Armstrong). Specifically, that personal gendered relations support and perpetuate the

political gender power relations, such as “in the institutions of marriage, motherhood

and compulsory heterosexuality, in the ‘private’ relations between the sexes and in the

everyday rituals and regimens that govern women’s relationships to themselves and

their bodies” (Armstrong). In other words, patriarchy exists through hegemonic

gendered performances, containing rituals and an underpinning ideology, which support

the gendered power structures. Understanding the patriarchy on the micro and macro
 Hopkins 4

levels, the personal practices and political apparatuses, are significant to an analysis of

The Handmaid’s Tale as the novel explores how various rituals and institutions, on the

micro level, uphold larger power structures.

Personal and intimate gendered performances that perpetuate an ideology and

structure which provides more power to men are, according to Butler, not innate but

constructed. Butler differentiates between sex and gender, with the former being

biological and the latter only social. They argue that “"the" body is invariably

transformed into his body or her body,” and that “the body is only known through its

gendered appearance” (522). This socialization of gender “originate within the family

and are enforced through certain familial modes of punishment and reward” (522).

Whilst much of The Handmaid’s Tale depicts the novel’s narrator living in a totalitarian

state, she is still socialized into the hegemonic feminine gender of Gilead via reward

and punishment. This is done via women known as “Aunts,” a possible nod to the ways

in which women are often gendered within the families by other women.

Given the totalitarian and patriarchal nature of Gilead’s government in the novel,

and the ways in which they have control of the literal means of production and

childbearing, it is significant to define certain Marxist concepts in relation to gendered

power relations. Alienation, for example, was the psychological and personal impact of

capitalism on the individual, according to Marx. He argued that workers were alienated

from the products of the labor in a capitalist system in addition to being alienated from

other workers as a result of competition. This obviously has significant psychological

and personal impacts which weaken the proletariat masses and keep the smaller group

of bourgeoisie in power. Frankel argues that “Feminine notions and the construction of
 Hopkins 5

the ‘woman’ are bound to a sexual identity created by a patriarchal narrative where one

need only replace Marx’s bourgeoisie with the patriarch to see the similarities” (47). She

makes comparisons that within patriarchy, women are commodified in the similar way a

worker is under capitalism; they are exploited as a result of their gender, such as limited

to producing children or domestic work, without being fairly compensated or having

little agency to live as they please (49). Like the worker must enter a contract of

exploitative employment or face destitution, so too must many women perform certain

roles like caretaker or mother, or face social exclusion. Additionally, where workers are

pitted to compete against one another in a capitalist system, women can also be in

competition with one another under patriarchy, especially when certain gendered

hierarchies and feminine performances are positioned above others (Frankel 54). This

can result in women being alienated from one another and therefore weakening their

position within the patriarchy. This is of importance to an analysis of The Handmaid’s

Tale as the novel depicts the many ways women are alienated: the Handmaids are

alienated from the products of their labor, the children they are forced to produce, whilst

women in general are alienated from one another via hierarchies and competition.

The Handmaid’s Tale begins in medias res with the narrator describing herself in

a center where she is to learn her new gendered role within the patriarchal and

totalitarian state of Gilead. This first chapter establishes the Aunts, who operate as both

teachers and police of gender performances. In this center, an old gymnasium, “Aunt

Sara and Aunt Elizabeth patrolled” with “electric cattle prods on thongs from their

leather belts” (20). The Aunts’ cattle prods are a tool for fear and violence, used to

punish the girls who do not perform as they are told; they are phallic symbols which
 Hopkins 6

could be read as signifiers for masculine power in general, especially when hung from

leather belts, which can also connote masculinity. Moreover, they dressed in all brown,

devoid of passionate colors, unlike the Handmaids in red, to signify their strict

dutifulness and general lack of femininity. These Aunts are immediately depicted as

being higher on the patriarchal hierarchy than handmaids, like the narrator. The

Handmaids “learned to whisper almost without sound” and could only reach out and

touch each other when the Aunts were not looking, suggesting their lack of agency and

power (20). The Aunts would “[hit] [the Handmaid’s] backs […] with a wooden pointer

if [they] slouch or slacken,” portraying the physical ways in which they would police

other women lower down the social hierarchy (204). They would “lick [the Handmaids]

into shape,” implying that they would socialize them into performing the desired

feminine role in Gilead. However, it is important to note that these Aunts were given

“No guns though [as] even they could not be trusted with guns. Guns were for the

guards, specially picked from the Angels” (20). Although Aunts wield significantly

more power than the Handmaids, shown via their role and the phallic objects they are

given to punish others, they are still not considered equal to men. Only men are

permitted to carry guns. The Aunts are employed by the state as patriarchal apparatuses

to police the Handmaids and are afforded some privileges, yet these privileges are still

unequal to men. By creating hierarchies which separate the exploited masses, they lose

power as a collective.

The Aunts also act as teachers with the center being an ideological institution

designed to teach the Handmaids the patriarchal ideology. Here, Aunt Lydia makes the

distinction between “Freedom to and freedom from,” and tells the Handmaid’s that they
 Hopkins 7

are “being given freedom from” from the patriarchal government (42). Aunt Lydia

creates a polar binary which lacks nuance in order to frame the state’s ideology

positively and encourage thankfulness in the young women (Al-shammari 16). In order

to keep such positions of power, although less power than their male counterparts, Aunts

must show gratitude towards the state. In doing so, Aunts legitimize an older belief that

“women see their own low status [within the patriarchy] as legitimate, because they

have been taught to think they are in need of personal protection from men” (Gillespie).

The Aunts and their positions exist to legitimize the patriarchy and its classic belief

systems within the novel. Within the state’s hierarchy, the occupy one of the highest

positions for women, rewarded for teaching and enforcing beliefs and rituals which

limit women such as this.

The Aunts also vilify women who do not conform to the normative ideals of

femininity within the text. The state expects women to marry and/or fulfil domestic

roles, and that those who can have children should offer themselves to powerful families

as Handmaids. Aunt Lydia preaches modesty and speaks of women before Gilead who

acted on their sexuality as “sluts,” “[wicked],” and “lazy” (123). Moreover, when Janine

tells the story of how “she was gang raped at fourteen and had an abortion,” Aunt

Helena asks whose fault it was “holding up one plump finger” (87). In response, as

though trained, the Handmaids shout and blame Janine in unison, repeating the phrase

“Her fault!” (88). Aunt Helena’s plump finger is another phallic symbol which

associates the instruction of this misogyny as being possibly something directed by the

patriarchy. Moreover, the call and response elicits the concept of conditioning, where

the Handmaids are being conditioned into vilifying any woman who steps outside of
 Hopkins 8

what is considered the norm under the current patriarchal hegemony. The following

week, Janine did not even give the other Handmaids the possibility to blame her and

instead admitted to being at fault. This act, orchestrated by Aunts, women of some

authority, highlights the efficacy of a “culture so readily punish[ing] or marginaliz[ing]

those who fail to perform” into an act which “constructs the social fiction” of those in

power (Butler 528). What The Handmaid’s Tale does is highlight that corrections to

performance are not necessarily something which occur as a result of the highest power

of the state, but via rituals and policing from members of the oppressed group;

specifically, the Aunts ritualize and condition the Handmaids to be misogynistic, and

such misogyny polices Janine into correcting herself. Read as a metaphor, this could

explain the ways in which older, matriarchal females, who view the structures as

protective, condition girls into policing other women if they do not perform properly.

The patriarchal hierarchy which privileges some women over others in the novel

further contributes to ways in which women cannot gain solidarity. This is particularly

true of one of the most privileged group of women: the Wives. Aunt Lydia explicitly

tells the Handmaids that “it’s not the husbands you have to watch out for […] it’s the

wives” (61). This sinister warning alludes to the fact that under this extreme patriarchal

structure, women become their own worst enemy. In the novel, the Wives are the upper-

class women who have married the Commanders of the patriarchal regime. They cannot

have their own children and so the Handmaids are sent to their household to undergo a

ceremony wherein the Handmaids are impregnated through a forced act of sex by the

Commanders whilst the wives sit behind them, with the Handmaids head’s resting on
 Hopkins 9

their laps, wrists in their hands. The Wives are fanatics who perpetuate the new

theological and patriarchal ideology, and wear blue to signify their virtue and purity.

The most featured Wife in the novel is Serena Joy, the Wife to whom the novel’s

protagonist Offred must serve. Serena, before the state of Gilead in contemporary

America, was a prominent religious teacher who Offred recognizes from when she was

on television, on the “Growing Souls Gospel Hour, where they would tell Bible stories

for children and sing hymns” (32). Serena’s character is quite possibly an allusion to

prominent evangelical women of the 1970s, such as Marabel Morgan or Tammy Faye

Bakker. Significantly, as a response to the femininst movements of the ‘60s and ‘70s,

there were a rise in “housewives who called for a submissive role for women” among

the Christian right. “The 1973 antifeminism best-seller The Total Woman by Marabel

Morgan insisted on the idea that "God ordained man to be the head of the family, its

president" (Coste). Morgan’s rhetoric regarding women was clear: "Your husband is

what he is. Accept him as that.... A Total Woman caters to her man’s special quirks,

whether it be in salads, sex, or sports" (Morgan 60, 57). Creating a character like Serena

who alludes to these historical women who opposed the feminist movement was an

effective choice. The Wives, whilst relatively high on the social hierarchy, are still

extremely limited. They, like all women in Gilead, cannot read, and are limited to

passive roles like gardening and knitting. In fact, Offred remarks that “these scarves

aren’t sent to the Angels at all, but unravelled and turned back into balls of yarn, to be

knitted again in their turn. Maybe it’s just something to keep the Wives busy,” and that

“many of the Wives have such gardens, it’s something for them to order and maintain

and care for” (28). In performing such roles which are designed to construct objects of
 Hopkins 10

beauty, the role of the Wives is also implied: they are passive objects of beauty (Santoso

41). Despite performing these tasks, Wives are not even permitted to assist with more

active domestic duties, as these are reserved for Marthas. Therefore, Atwood is able to

criticize the antifeminist, evangelical, right-wing women of the 1970s by constructing

characters who have achieved what their rhetoric argued for: their duty is to serve their

husbands as masters with no opportunity to actively participate in anything other than

passive roles often associated with virtue.

The novel does also emphasize the effect that the limiting structures put upon

the Wives has on their relationships with other women. When Offred first meets Serena,

their power differences are emphasized by diction and tone. Serena asks whether “old

what’s-his-face didn’t work out,” whilst Offred replies “No, Ma’am” (30-31). Serena’s

more causal register and accusatory tone place her as being superior to Offred, reiterated

by Offred’s formal response. “Irritably,” however, Serena scolds Offred and says “don’t

call me Ma’am, […] you’re not a Martha” (31). This is a form of policing wherein

Serena corrects Offred’s performance as Handmaid, implying that even addressing the

Wife is something above her station. Her disdain for Handmaids is also depicted when

she offers Offred a chair but says she can sit “just this time” because she “does not make

a practice of it" (31). Later in the novel, during the Ceremony, Serena Joy painfully

grips Offred’s wrists and, when it is over, angrily tells her to “Get up and get out,”

despite being supposed to rest for 10 minutes (107-108). Although Serena and her

husband the Commander do not seem to have a loving relationship, there does seem to

be clear jealousy towards Offred and anger at her role in intruding on their marriage

(Santoso 41). In this manner, the structures of Gilead to alienate women from each other
 Hopkins 11

by forcing them to compete with one another. The Handmaids are valued for their

ability to bear children, whilst Wives are valued for beauty and virtue. Given that the

economy of Gilead is inextricably linked to childrearing, in certain contexts Handmaids

have more value over Wives which results in the subsequent alienation of the two

groups from one another and weakens women in general.

The social gap between the Wives and the Handmaids is perhaps most evident

during the Birthing ceremony. In this section, Janine is giving birth to a child conceived

by her Commander, Warren. All Handmaids and Waves are expected to join the

ceremony to perform their womanly duties, whilst “The Commander, of course, is

nowhere in sight” (127). During this ceremony, the Wife of Warren “paraded” Janine

out so “the other wives [...] could see her belly,” as one shows off a prized possession,

not a person, underscoring the power relationship between the two women within the

social structure of Gilead. However, the Wife of Warren still must perform as a child-

bearing woman within the structure, as she “lies on the floor, in a white cotton

nightgown” simulating the act of birthing whilst the other wives “massage her tiny

belly,” indicating that this is how women are valued (179-180). When the time for

Janine to finally give births arrive, the Wife of Warren climbs into the back seat of a

“Birthing Stool” which is “like a throne” in front of where Janine sits, with the Wife

“framing her” like she is a still, trapped; she is just an impression of a person. After the

child is born, it is “placed ceremoniously in [the Wife of Warren’s] hands” and looks at

the baby although it is “something she’s won, a tribute” (195). Conversely, for Janine,

“she’ll be allowed to nurse the baby, for a few months [...] after that she’ll be

transferred, to see if she can do it again, with someone else who needs a turn” (196).
 Hopkins 12

The diction in “allowed” implies that this is a reward for Janine, to temporarily perform

motherly duties as a surrogate, but it is immediately revealed that, like a communally

shared object, she’d be sent on to the next to be used.

Even though these Handmaids are forced into servitude and do provide a service

for the Wives, they are still met with disdain and criticism. They speak of the

Handmaids as “Little whores, all of them,” but not that “still, you can’t be choosy,” a

tone which implies their existence is simply endured (127). Another continues

complaining that “some of them […] aren’t even clean. And won’t give you a smile,

mope in their rooms, don’t wash their hair, the smell,” continuing that she has to

“threaten” the Handmaids to bath (127). One other talks of “tak[ing] stern measures

with [hers]” (127). All of these comments are examples of how power structures which

place the subordinate group into a hierarchy creates further division. The Wives hold

more power than the Handmaids, yet still hold little power in the novel, yet they are

quick to abuse their power over the one group they can due to feelings of jealousy

caused by a patriarchal government which emphasizes that value comes from

childrearing, which the Wives cannot do (Callaway 55).

In addition to the Aunts and Wives being critical of the Handmaids, Marthas also

treat them negatively. The Marthas perform the domestic roles within the house for the

Commanders and their Wives. They are dressed in green and remain in the home.

Although Handmaids are valued for their ability to produce children, they are still low

on the social hierarchy, Marthas remain above them. As such, one of the two prominent

Marthas in the novel, Rita, often remins Offred of her role. She “[talks] about [Offred]

as though [she] can’t hear. To them [she’s] a household chore, one among many” (63).
 Hopkins 13

Rita is an older woman, “over sixty” whose “mind’s made up” that Offred is “common

(63). The other Martha of the house is Cora, who is much younger and is excited about

the idea of possibly having a child in the home. To this extent, she offers some kindness

and protection. Offred does desire to “fraternize,” as she calls it, with the two Marthas.

She wishes to talk with them in the kitchen as they bake bread. Yet, “if I were to violate

decorum to that extent, Rita would not allow it. She would be too afraid. The Marthas

are not supposed to fraternize with us” (26). This rule highlights the ways in which there

is a deliberate plot by the patriarchal state to weaken women in the novel. However, in

contemporary societies, a lack of feminine consciousness can exist because there is an

emphasis on the differences between women rather than their similarities (Huddy et. al.

36). If women are conditioned to focus on what can divide them, as is the case in

Gilead, then unity becomes difficult to achieve.

In fact, even among the Handmaids, there is still a lack of feminine

consciousness. Whilst relationships do form among the Handmaids, there are also

plentiful examples where they criticize and compete with one another. Offred speaks of

“Ofwarren, formerly that whiny bitch Janine” whilst other Handmaids “hiss” the name

“show-off” to her when she becomes pregnant (44). Offred’s walking partner Ofglen is

someone who, according to Offred, speaks “piously” like a true believer (48). She

complains and “wish[es] she would just shut up and let [her] walk in peace” (48).

However, Offred acknowledges that the structures of the state stop these women from

gaining solidarity when she notes that “the truth is that she is my spy, as I am hers” (36).

This is significant as it highlights the ways in which the state employ women as
 Hopkins 14

patriarchal state apparatuses to police each other’s behaviors, limiting their feminine

consciousness, and stopping them from uniting to confront the patriarchy.

Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale does depict a dystopian state defined by its

theocratic and patriarchal ideologies which places men in positions of power and limits

women by placing them into divided roles. In these hierarchal roles, women police and

compete with one another which prevent them from unifying. They become alienated

from one another which weakens their overall power and allows for the continuation of

the patriarchal state. However, Atwood also depicts and criticizes contemporary

America via Offred’s included memories. The description Offred offers of her mother

and her mother’s “rowdy” friends imply that they were feminists. However, even these

women displays examples of internalized misogyny. For example, Offred’s mother

describes how, after having Offred, her “oldest buddy Tricia Foreman accused [her] of

being a pronatalist,” to which Offred’s mother shames her as “the bitch” (144). Even in

this context, a woman’s feminist organization still sees its members emphasizing their

differences rather than their similarities. These women would be counter-cultural to the

patriarchy of the 1970s and ‘80s, and so have protested as a group; but they still divide

themselves ideological. Additionally, she recalls being criticized as a single parent even

by this group. Whilst this feminist group is against a patriarchy, one might argue that

they still exist because of patriarchy. As such, an argument can be made that the

patriarchy has forced women to take sides, alienating themselves from the larger whole,

and weakening them.

Atwood critiques patriarchy and, more specifically, the means of alienating

women from one another through taxonomizing female gender performances and
 Hopkins 15

encouraging competition via Offred. Offred is someone who, to an extent, internalizes

the patriarchal ideologies and accepts her place within patriarchy. She “used to think of

my body as an instrument, of pleasure, or a means of transportation, or an implement for

the accomplishment of [her] will” (88). She describes her activeness as being someone

who “could use [her body] to run, push buttons, of one sort or another, make things

happen. There were limits but my body was nevertheless lithe, single, solid, one with

[her] (88). However, as her mother often points out, Offred enjoyed her freedoms

without concern for the larger feminine group. She, in other words, lacked feminine

consciousness. She events admits that she “lived […] by ignoring” as an active effort,

ignoring the struggles of other women, mentioning “corpses in ditches,” hinting at the

rape and murder of women (71). She says “they were about other women,” and feels no

solidarity with them. Later, she describes her body as “a cloud, congealed around a

central object, the shape of a pear, which is hard and more real than [she is] and glows

red within its translucent wrapping” (88). Fundamentally, Offred is, initially at least,

characterized as a woman who accepts the patriarchal hegemony, enjoying freedoms

without concern for other women in contemporary America, and is mostly concerned of

her own sanity and survival in the Gileadean state. Stillman and Johnson make this

point and conclude that “Offred shows herself to be self-absorbed, focused on her own

happiness or survival, and unconcerned with women as a group, with society at large,

and even with the quality of her own life.15 She has internalized the expectations of the

Gilead regime, as she had those of the contemporary United States, soothing her ills

with romantic dreams and hopes” (81). The fact that Offred gives herself “over into the

hands of strangers” might serve as a warning that unless women are conscious of a
 Hopkins 16

shared feminine struggle and do all in their power to unite, patriarchal structures will

continue to alienate and disempower women in general (301).

In conclusion, Atwood creates the dystopian setting of Gilead to reflect the ways

in which contemporary patriarchal structures might taxonomize female gender roles

which results in women policing one another or competing with one another. The

fictional state provides extremely limited roles for women, whether they are to act as

teachers of gender, objects of beauty and virtue, or as objects of childrearing. Whilst this

is an extreme, it does draw parallels between the ways contemporary societies might

pigeonhole women into certain ideals, whether this be the whore or Madonna, the

loving mother or strong businesswomen, criticizing those who cross over boundaries

established by patriarchal hegemony. Atwood’s novel also highlights the ways in which

women become alienated from one another in this process. Via the establishment of a

hierarchy, women attempt to protect their space within the patriarchy if it has more

privileges than other types of performance. Whether this is the Marthas criticizing the

Handmaids and reducing their suffering down to a choice, or the Aunts who must show

gratefulness via violent punishment of Handmaids, women cling to their stations for

their own protection, distancing themselves from any solidarity. Additionally, the

women in Gilead emphasize their differences and Other one another, rather than finding

common similarities which would unite them against the patriarchy, and subsequently

compete with one another rather than working together. As such, the novel can be read

as a criticism of the ways women might become their own worst enemy in the fight

against patriarchy because of the ways the structures explicitly and implicitly pit them

against each other. Through this analysis, one can draw the conclusions that if the
 Hopkins 17

patriarchy is to be torn down with an ideology and structure more equitable in its place,

then women must unite as one, regardless of differences, and must become conscious of

the ways they are divided, whether this division is deliberate or not.
 Hopkins 18

Works Cited

Al-shammari, Huda Aziz Muhi, and Nidaa Hussain Fahmi Al-Khazraji. “Ideological

Representation of Women’s Oppression in Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s

Tale.” Al-Adab Journal, vol. 3, no. 138, 2021, pp. 15–22. Crossref,

https://doi.org/10.31973/aj.v3i138.1771.

Armstrong, Aurelia. “Foucault, Michel: Feminism.” Internet Encyclopedia of Philoso-

phy, iep.utm.edu/foucfem. Accessed 31 July 2022.

Atwood, Margaret. The Handmaids Tale. e-book, London, Vintage Books, 2017.

Butler, Judith. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. 1st Edition, e-

book, Routledge Classics, 2022.

Butler, Judith. “Performative Acts and Gender Constitution: An Essay in

Phenomenology and Feminist Theory.” Theatre Journal, vol. 40, no. 4, 1988, pp.

519–31. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/3207893. Accessed 31 Jul. 2022.

Callaway, Alanna A., "Women disunited : Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale as a

critique of feminism" (2008). Master's Theses. 3505. DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31979/etd.yxmy-ds98

Connell, R. Gender and Power: Society, the Person, and Sexual Politics. 1st ed.,

Stanford University Press, 1987.

Coste, Françoise. “Conservative Women and Feminism in the United States: Between

Hatred and Appropriation.” Caliban, no. 27, 2010, pp. 167–76. Crossref,

https://doi.org/10.4000/caliban.2111.
 Hopkins 19

Frankel, A. “Kept Down By the Man, Damn the Man: The Figurative and Literal

Alienation of Women”. Stance: An International Undergraduate Philosophy

Journal, vol. 5, no. 1, Sept. 2012, pp. 45-54, doi:10.33043/S.5.1.45-54.

Gillespie, Katherine. “Understanding the Women Who Back the Patriarchy.” Vice News,

7 Aug. 2017, www.vice.com/en/article/wjnw84/understanding-the-women-who-

back-the-patriarchy.

Huddy, Leonie, et al. “Sources of Political Unity Among Women.” 100 Years of

Women’s Suffrage, 2019, pp. 197–226. Crossref, https://doi.org/10.5406/j.ctvs-

f1p2f.15.

Santoso, Luciana Kristianti. Glieadean Women’s Reponses to the Practices of

Patriarchy in Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale. Sanata Dharma

University. http://repository.usd.ac.id/id/eprint/40242

Stillman, Peter, and Johnson, S. Anne. “Identity, Complicity, and Resistance in The

Handmaid’s Tale.” Utopian Studies, vol. 5, no. 2, 1994, pp. 70–86. JSTOR,

http://www.jstor.org/stable/20719314. Accessed 7 Jul. 2022.