BookClub logo

The Handmaid's Tale - A Comparative Analysis

I got a C on this thesis because my research wasn't academic enough. This post contains spoilers for The Handmaid's Tale. Warning: It's an academic paper.

By Ashley LimaPublished 11 months ago 22 min read
The Handmaid's Tale - A Comparative Analysis
Photo by Umid Akbarov on Unsplash

TW: mentions of rape, misogyny, and violence.

​​You have countries where women have never had rights. You have other countries where [women] had them and they’re being taken away. What you can say about every totalitarian government, whatever their reason of being they say they have, or whatever their ideology, one thing they always do is roll back women’s rights. Every single one of them.

Margaret Atwood (2019)

The Handmaid’s Tale, published in 1985, depicts the dystopian Republic of Gilead, a post-modern America suffering beneath a radical, patriarchal, theocracy. Categorized as speculative fiction, it seeks to depict a near-future not so far removed from our own current reality. Though it was published nearly four decades ago, the issues happening in the eighties that inspired Margaret Atwood’s dystopia have not gone away.

Some fear similar oppressive politics might be right around the corner. Perhaps they're already here. In order to fully comprehend how societies can fall into the hands of an oppressive ruling class, it’s important to examine the ways in which a democracy crumbles and cults gain steam. There is a hierarchal structure in action in the Republic of Gilead that keeps each caste in its respective place and keeps the characters at bay to the oppressive forces that control them. Each class serves its purpose in protecting the “norm”, but the patriarchy involved affects each social group differently.

Women are key components in seeing this authoritarian regime come to light, and while they are the most subjugated gender, men suffer under this patriarchy as well. The suffering of men in Gilead casts blame on women. For some men in this society, women are perceived to have the power in the situation. Misunderstandings of feminism and the patriarchy, alongside the manipulation of fear, create radicalized thinking. Similar thought processes can be observed in modernity; radical evangelical Christianity and online alt-right forums are breeding grounds for popular counter-culture movements that seek to revert back to a male-dominated society.

By analyzing the content of Margaret Atwood’s, The Handmaid’s Tale, and dissecting Gilead’s hierarchal structure and the ways that the Republic oppresses its citizens, we can begin to understand the ways in which anti-feminist movements are gaining traction in modern American society.

I. The Rise of Gilead, Hierarchy and Oppression

Some citizens of Gilead fully subscribe to the lifestyle forced upon them. Others are thrust into these beliefs against their will and must comply with the demands of the government in order to protect themselves. There are separate roles for men and women. The men at the top are Commanders. They are in charge of creating the laws of the land, the politicians. The Eyes are a form of secret police that bring to light any infractions of the rules. The Angels are Gilead’s soldiers and are permitted to marry. The Guardians are Gilead’s young soldiers that eventually get promoted to Angel-ship should they prove themselves worthy.

The women at the top are the Wives of Commanders. The Aunts are second in the hierarchal chain, as they are responsible for “training” handmaids and teaching young women the rules they must subscribe to under Gilead's rule. The Econowives are women that are fertile, pure, and able to have children with their non-Commander husbands. The Handmaid’s are women that are fertile, but morally impure; they are not permitted to marry but obligated to produce children for the state. The Marthas are infertile but pure and bound to households to care for homely duties such as cooking, cleaning, and childcare for the Wives. The Unwomen are infertile and impure, past the point of saving; they are banished to the colonies where they work themselves to death.

For those who do not wish to be involved in this society and dream of escape, what is being used to keep them there? There is a myriad of brainwashing techniques prevalent throughout the novel to keep Gilead citizens in line. From “The Nuanced Psychology of The Handmaid’s Tale”:

One obvious manifestation of the patriarchy is the use of terms like “Offred” to define The Narrator, that is, “Property of Fred.” The Handmaids are forced to go by these new names, and they change based on which Commander they serve as a Handmaid (70).

Not only does this practice dub the handmaids as the property of a man, but the change in language strips them of any past identity. This othering of the handmaids makes them marginalized in their own households as well. There is no feminine camaraderie. They don’t get to join together with the other women of the house in their shared oppression. Their differences are hyper-fixated.

Anyways, [the handmaids are] doing it for us all, said Cora, or so they say. If I hadn’t gotten my tubes tied, it could have been me, say I was ten years younger. It’s not that bad. It’s not what you’d call hard work.

Better her than me, Rita said, and I opened the door. Their faces were the way women’s faces are when they’ve been talking about you behind your back and they think you heard: embarrassed, but also a little defiant, as if it were their right (10).

The Marthas, Cora and Rita, will never bare children for Gilead. Housemaid is their role and there is no safe way out of it. Their opposing views on the role of the handmaid are interesting. Cora sounds more naïve, as she’s subscribing to the whims of the patriarchy, wishing she could be in Offred’s shoes, and fantasizing about the thought of being fertile. At least she wouldn’t have to do “hard work”.

Rita, on the other hand, acknowledges the pain that comes with being a handmaid. She doesn’t want to be in that position; at least as a Martha, she keeps her name and her dignity. The Marthas also have some semblance of right to talk about Offred behind her back, and they will not be punished for it. Offred is meant to be grateful for everything she has, for the "opportunity" she has in Gilead.

Offred’s censorship is evident in an interaction she has with Serena Joy:

I want to see as little of you as possible, she said. I expect you feel the same way about me.

I didn’t answer, as a yes would have been insulting, a no contradictory (15).

Serena Joy, the Wife, has the most perceived power in the household. Offred is forced to bite her tongue to protect herself, but Serena can say anything she wants, and do anything she pleases with Offred.

I was disappointed. I wanted then to turn [Serena] into an older sister, a motherly figure, someone who would understand and protect me (15).

The hierarchy of the home dynamic has handmaids at the bottom, Marthas in the middle, and Wives at the top. Though they all fall under the subjugation of the Commander:

The Commander knocks at the door. The knock is prescribed: the sitting room is supposed to be Serena Joy’s territory, he’s supposed to ask permission to enter it. She likes to keep him waiting. It’s a little thing, but in this household little things mean a lot. Tonight, however, she doesn’t even get that, because before Serena Joy can speak he steps forward into the room anyway (86).

One way in which the patriarchy keeps its control is the illusion of power given to female characters. The Wives use their perceived power to subjugate those beneath them as a way to cope with the real powerlessness they feel within their own lives.

Any semblance of power, no matter how small, can turn people into monsters. The Stanford Prison Experiment comes to mind; a situation in which psychologist Philip G. Zimbardo allotted college students roles of prisoner and guard in an attempt to observe how far one will take a position of authority when they feel their actions are just. From "Understanding Evil”:

Individual brutality may not have been universal, but a brutal culture quickly developed and then went unchallenged. This is exactly how corrupt and abusive environments work, and we really do need to understand them (45).

The laws of the land in Gilead are so brutal, and so oppressive, to just about everyone involved, aside from those at the top. How were they able to get so many “lesser” individuals to subscribe to their demands? Complacency. Thoughts such as “this could never happen here” or “this behavior isn’t actively affecting me” allows for movements to rise up in the background. Margaret Atwood says herself:

I didn’t make [this] up. When I wrote The Handmaid’s Tale, nothing went into it that had not happened in real life somewhere at some time.

In The Handmaid's Tale, enough people in the United States were complacent, which allowed the minority to rise up against the government and implement the Republic of Gilead. In history, we watched this happen in 1930s Germany through the rise of Hitler and his Nazi regime.

Once power is gained over a population, how is it kept without resistance? Stockholm syndrome can provide answers:

The term Stockholm syndrome was coined after the 1973 robbery of Kreditbanken in Stockholm, Sweden, in which two robbers held four bank employees hostage from August 23 to 28. During this time, the victims shared a vault and became very familiar with their captors—in fact, they wound up emotionally attached and even defended them after the ordeal. Today, people view Stockholm syndrome as a psychological response of a hostage or an individual in a similar situation in which the more dominant person has the power to put the victim’s life in danger. Perpetrators occasionally use this advantage to get victims to comply with their demands.

The Gilead regime had come to power. Whether those who helped create it intended for it to be as oppressive as it ended up being, doesn’t matter. Now everyone is in this mess together. Whether or not somebody agrees with the laws of the land, they are bound to follow them. Men and women alike must subscribe to the rules if they want to be kept alive.

Their will to live and their shared oppressed identities in this cruel reality help to form bonds between the abuse. Very unlikely ones. When describing the Ceremony, Offred’s thoughts are rather peculiar:

Copulating too would be inaccurate, because it would imply two people and only one is involved. Nor does rape cover it: nothing is going on here that I haven’t signed up for (94).

What’s happening to Offred is rape. The fact that she chose to become a handmaid in order to protect herself from a slow and painful death in the colonies doesn’t change that. She does not want to be living this life at all, she is forced to by the authoritarian regime in charge. She’s begun to sympathize with the way the world is run and accept her position.

Gaslighting is a way in which Stockholm syndrome comes to life. From the Salem Press Encyclopedia:

Gaslighting is emotional abuse that causes a victim to question his or her own sanity and judgment (Butts).

Gilead uses the bible to gaslight its citizens, particularly the women. In the Red Center, where women are trained to become handmaids by the Aunts, Janine tells the story of her rape and abortion at just fourteen

Her fault, her fault, her fault, we chant in unison.

Who led them on? Aunt Helena beams, pleased with us.

She did. She did. She did.

Why did God allow such a terrible thing to happen?

Teach her a lesson. Teach her a lesson. Teach her a lesson.

This patriarchal society puts all the blame on women. Infertility? The woman’s fault. Rape? The woman’s fault. This repetitive abuse and manipulation will have victims beginning to believe it, keeping them stuck in their place within Gilead.

Another way in which Gilead controls women is by restricting reading and writing. This is something that dates back to the beginning of theocracies. Those at the top (upper-class men) had the ability to read the bible. The illiterate at the bottom could not. It was much easier to control a population who couldn’t question your teachings. For if the subjugated population were to read the original text, they would come to find that their leaders are changing, cherry-picking, and manipulating passages in order to maintain control. This method of control is very prevalent in The Handmaid’s Tale:

For lunch it was the Beatitudes. Blessed be this, blessed be that. They played it from a tape so not even an Aunt would be guilty of the sin of reading. The voice was a man’s. Blessed be the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are the merciful. Blessed be the meek. Blessed are the silent. I knew they made that up, I knew it was wrong, and they left things out, too, but there was no way of checking” (89).

Key aspects of the Beatitudes are missing. Such as:

Blessed are they that have been persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven (The Holy Bible).

There is a reason this is not drilled into the heads of the handmaids. There is a reason women are not permitted to read even the holiest text that informs the laws of the land. Were they to know that they were being persecuted for righteousness' sake, according to the Bible, they would surely do something about their current positions within Gilead society. Offred knows the passages being taught to her are wrong, but due to her position, she has no way to counter them. Due to strenuous repetition of the wrong words, she cannot remember the right ones. She is forced to subscribe to only what is told directly to her.

While men are not as oppressed as women under the Republic of Gilead, if they are not a Commander, their life is lived in fear just the same. Only certain men are allowed to marry. Only those men are allowed to have sex. There is no love in Gilead. Nick, a guardian and the Commander’s driver, catches feelings for Offred and she for him. They act upon these feelings within the confines of the novel, even under Serena’s supervision, in order to produce a child. But were they to get caught by the Eye and turned in for their crimes, Nick would be put to death.

It’s difficult to know what the punishment would be for Offred. Perhaps due to her fertility, she’d be forgiven and allowed to be a handmaid again. Towards the end of the novel, there is a scene in which a man is publicly stoned:

“This man,” says Aunt Lydia, “has been convicted of rape.” Her voice trembles with rage, and a kind of triumph. “He was once a Gaurdian. He has disgraced his uniform. He has abused his position of trust. His partner in viciousness has already been shot. The penalty for rape, as you know, is death. Deuteronomy 22:23-29. I might add this crime involved two of you and took place at gunpoint. It was also brutal” (278).

In this scenario it’s interesting because Aunt Lydia points out that two handmaids were raped, therefore this man must die. While there is no denying rape must be punished, when discussing Janine’s rape at the Red Center, Janine was the one to blame. Yet Atwood reveals:

Don’t be stupid. He wasn’t a rapist at all, he was a political. He was one of ours [the resistance]. I knocked him out. Put him out of his misery (280).

Gilead manipulates what is convenient to them politically. In the case of Nick and Offred, their romance is consensual, yet because it’s outside of the bounds of marriage and handmaid ownership, their relationship is considered rape. Gilead picks and chooses exceptions to rules when it benefits those at the top. This skews the power and can make men in lesser positions, such as Guardians, resentful of the women within society.

For some men, it seems as though Gilead is built to protect women; but the only oppression men experience in the novel is done onto them by other, more powerful men. Their oppression is a class issue, not a gender issue, but they’re manipulated into blaming the women. This creates more misogyny, more complacency, and makes it much harder to break away from the oppression.

II. Modern Politics: Trad Wives, INCEL’s, Q-Anon and January 6th

There are real phenomena present within the most recent decade pointing to a rise in authoritarian right-winged ideology. Though these countercultures seem to be fringe groups, there are recent controversies that prove damaging policy can be implemented into the mainstream. What are tradwives, incels, and Q-Anon supporters? How did these ideologies contribute to January 6th? How are these movements pushing oppressive policy in real-time? The Handmaid’s Tale can give us some clues into these modern patriarchal groups and how they function.

The feminist movement has always advocated for equality for women. Some people believe the goal of feminism is for women to gain power over men. This way of thinking produces some of the most notoriously damaged personalities on the internet. Involuntary Celibates, or incels for short. Per Merriam-Webster:

Incel - a person (usually a man) who regards himself or herself as being involuntarily celibate and typically expresses extreme resentment and hostility toward those who are sexually active.

Extreme resentment is an understatement. By browsing online forums about involuntary celibacy, it’s easy to pinpoint where the resentment lies. While many young men share their distaste for “Chads” (they claim Chads are the attractive 20% of men who can get any woman they want), most vitriol is turned towards women. According to a Vox article:

Incels see women as either “Stacys,” who are hyperfeminine, attractive, and unattainable and who only date “Chads” (muscular, popular men who are presumed to sleep with lots of women), or “Beckys,” the “average” woman. Women in general are also referred to in dehumanizing terms such as “femoids” or “FHOs (Female Humanoid Organism) (Jennings).

These code names, however new they may be, hold a very similar purpose as the language in The Handmaid’s Tale. As handmaids are stripped of their identities by obtaining the name of their Commander, incels work to strip the identity of normal people by categorizing them into subtypes. They use dehumanizing language in reference to women in order to other the female sex. There is no individual identity under this frame of thought. It’s very much an “us vs. them” mentality with no perceived exceptions to these unrealistic rules.

While most people who have trouble finding romantic partners don’t stoop to this level, it’s not complicated to see how many young men may fall into this trap. A quick Google search is all it takes. Then they might find YouTube videos, made by young men, who have the same problems as they do. In order to fit in and relate, they’ll start adopting the vocabulary and joining forums to gain a sense of community. Then, one day, they might find themselves on the other side, deeply involved in a radicalized sub-culture.

During my research, I happened to stumble across a self-proclaimed incel, who goes by Adam No Eve on YouTube, reviewing The Handmaid’s Tale. He was referencing an article that has since been deleted, but his views on the matter are definitely disturbing and go to show how intelligent people can become brainwashed into negative thinking quite easily. Needless to say, he’s never read the literature or viewed the show himself, still he indulges us with his point of view:

Feminists think the point of patriarchy is to just enslave all women and genocide them out of existence (2:02-2:11).

The article states: "A typical patriarchy usually involves agreeing to things like enforced monogamy or limited polygamy so no alpha males can hog all the fertile females to himself.” Hm, that actually sounds a little bit anti-patriarchal. It sounds a little egalitarian to me. But feminists don’t like that because they want all the 20% of alpha males on top. (2:43-3:09).

Remember, feminists want the exact opposite of everything that they say they do (4:06-4:11).

Reducing economic rights is just equalizing it because women have a major economic advantage; it’s called opening up their legs. They use their sexual faculties to receive whatever resource that they want (4:20-4:44).

Men’s lives become more miserable where women become pampered and safe and just forced to make babies (9:05-9:12) (Adam No Eve).

Adam No Eve has a very one-sided point of view. He states all of his opinions as if they are facts. If he were to read The Handmaid’s Tale, or indulge in the television series, I don’t think he would come away from it with a change of heart. He wholeheartedly thinks that men are oppressed in society because of women; that women hold all the power.

What he fails to acknowledge is that men can be oppressed under the patriarchy, though it’s not due to the basis of their assigned sex. It is also not the woman’s fault that men are subjugated, it’s other men. As viewed in The Handmaid’s Tale, male oppression is based entirely on class.

The misunderstanding of feminism and patriarchy is what propels these fringe counterculture movements. When one finds themselves in an echo chamber online, it’s hard to escape. In the same ways that it’s hard for Gilead’s citizens to escape their tyrannical government. Some of the posts from male incels that I’ve seen have gone as far as to defend rape as a male’s biological right. This ideology echo’s that of Gilead’s puritanical sex culture.

Tradwives are another phenomenon popping up online and going viral in recent years. On the surface, the movement seems rather innocent. From an article by Woman and Home:

“A 'tradwife' (short for traditional wife) is a 21st century woman who has decided to embrace super traditional, conventional gender roles, by 'submitting' to their husband and not working, staying at home to do the typical household chores, and care for the children” (Hunt).

Under feminism, that’s all fine and good. Equality means everybody has the ability to make their own decisions and to do with their life what they wish. Whether one wants to have a career or be a stay home mother, is their choice and should be celebrated. The problem comes when one dives deeper into the religious radicalization of a vast handful of young women who are adopting this lifestyle. Julie Enber went undercover to “meet the women radicalized to serve men.” What she found, is astounding:

“You know what distinguishes the average girlfriend from wife material?” Marie asks.

“I have no idea,” Liz replies.

“Well, you know what the womanly duties are?” Marie continues. “One of the things I love about my Captain is that he tells me exactly what he expects of and exactly what he wants. I take care of the house, watch our kids and tend to his sexual needs.

Liz seems doubtful. “But I thought that being an independent woman is attractive to men?”

“What kind of life would a man get when he chooses you?” Marie asks. “Can you deliver the care and nurturing a man wants and needs? If not, then why should any man pick you.”

No response.

“Don’t blame yourself, blame it on feminism, blame it on modernity,” Marie insists. “We have been brainwashed, it’s normal that it takes you some time to go back to the natural state” (Enber).

The problem arises when these women start aligning their value to their ability to find and keep a good husband. It’s genuinely quite similar to the incel rhetoric. Where incels blame women for their lack of sex, women blame themselves for their lack of maintaining a long-term relationship. They begin to subscribe to this long checklist of femininity and requirements in order to secure a “good” husband. Their self-hatred is then projected onto the feminist movement in a way to convince themselves that what they are doing is the “natural” way of things.

This aligns with the gaslighting and Stockholm syndrome that occurs throughout The Handmaid’s Tale. The environment they are building and advertising is only ideal for one particular group of people: upper-class, cis-gendered, heterosexual people. Not all relationships are male-female. Not all couples have the economic security to have one-half of the relationship stay home and care for the children. To say this particular way of living is the “natural” way is ultimately a form of gaslit manipulation.

The women in the literature believe if they just play along and do everything they’re supposed to, that their lives will be okay. This mindset seems very similar to the rhetoric being spread by prolific Tradwives online. There is a plethora of female alt-right influencers that spread these patriarchal-centered views: Girl Defined and Abby Shapiro come to mind.

A common theme for their content is using the Bible and their religion to spread their very particular way of life. They echo that it is the “natural” way to live insinuating that other lifestyles are wrong, immoral, and bad. For young girls and women who are religious and insecure in their identities, this is a really easy way to radicalize them.

We know from The Handmaid’s Tale, women play a crucial part in the rise of the Republic of Gilead. Serena Joy was a prolific spokeswoman for the incoming government before its official implementation. Now she is stuck in her home, silenced, while her husband has sex with other women in order to try and conceive a baby. If these Tradwife influencers were really practicing what they preached, they would not have the money, success, and platform to speak out about their beliefs. They take what we’ve worked hard on throughout history in feminism for granted. They are paving the way for men who’d like to play the role of Commander to step into power.

One of the most dangerous and quickly growing mass-conspiracy movements in The United States is Q-Anon. Q-Anon in its most basic form, is an alt-right conspiracy theory that center’s around the idea that liberal elites sexually assault and traffic children to extract their adrenochrome. The group’s focus on villainous liberalism has paved the way for other right-wing-minded groups to join and expand the conspiracy.

It didn’t start as pro-Trump, but it is now. One core belief they have is that Trump was sent by God in order to save the children from liberal pedophiles. As soon as Covid-19 hit, the group began adopting anti-lockdown rhetoric. Once the vaccines hit shelves under a Biden presidency, anti-vax propaganda became the new style. The conspiracies are ever-evolving as the make-up of Q-Anon believers is ever-changing.

The belief systems overlap with the ideology present in the incel and trad wife trends. Because of the group’s vast diversity of conspiracy theories, as long as a person believes in one idea, it’s easy to get sucked into the rest through online echo chambers. This mass manipulation is very similar to that of Gilead and explains how rapidly their power was able to spread over the United States within the novel.

Though the average American would look at these forms of belief with a chuckle and think to themselves how outlandish they are, there are two current sitting members of Congress who subscribe to these ideas: Marjorie Taylor Greene and Lauren Boebert. These women winning elections to some of the highest positions of power in the land should be enough for people to realize that these fringe groups aren’t so fringe anymore.

While these are the only two congresspeople who have spoken in support of the conspiracy, Q-Anon, there are many more members of Congress who tout similar rhetoric. There is a newfound understanding by the Republican party about the impact this conspiracy theory has on its voting population. Politicians, generally, are willing to say whatever will get them elected. Conservative politicians have begun to echo the sentiment of Q-Anon ideology without referencing the conspiracy outright, bringing these beliefs into the mainstream to unsuspecting lifelong Republicans. The ideas that created the Republic of Gilead are being fed to people without their knowledge, and it’s being adopted all over the United States.

The belief in these conspiracies is so strong, in fact, that there was an attempted coup on the U.S. Government on January 6th, 2020. Gilead was formed by a seemingly minority fringe group in the United States. They gained power in the background and rose up with violence. If Margaret Atwood’s analysis of the world through The Handmaid’s Tale is correct, January 6th is only a taste of what’s to come.

The fall of democracy doesn’t happen overnight. It happens slowly and under our noses:

We lived, as usual, by ignoring. Ignoring isn’t the same as ignorance, you have to work at it. Nothing changes instantaneously: in a gradually heating bathtub you'd be boiled to death before you knew it... The newspaper stories were like dreams to us, bad dreams dreamt by others. How awful, we would say, and they were, but they were awful without being believable. They were too melodramatic, they had a dimension that was not the dimension of our lives (Atwood, 56).

With the internet at everybody's fingertips, radical, toxic, patriarchal groups are more outspoken than ever. The public shouldn’t be so quick to laugh them off. Pennsylvanian candidate for governor, Steven Lynch, spoke to a crowd of supporters on August 29th, 2021, and what he had to say is eerily familiar:

Men, where are you? Men, wake up, smell the coffee, let’s go. Make men great again. Right? Make men, men again. Let’s go. Men, I need you in the coming weeks because when we walk into those school boards, we’re going to have everything we need to remove [elected board members]. I’m going in with twenty strong men and I’m going to give them an option: they can leave or be removed (Lynch, 0:05-0:46).

Gilead rode to power on the backs of violent men who wanted their way of life to be put into place unquestioned. Steve Lynch lost the election, but he wasn’t speaking to an empty crowd. There is danger in writing off radical thinkers as outliers, these ideologies have already infiltrated the mainstream and are trending to continue growing in large numbers.

Freedom is something that is widely argued for from the right, from the average Republican to the radical. Freedom seems to be of utmost importance. What kinds of freedoms are we talking about?

Now we walk along the same street, in red pairs, and no man shouts obscenities at us, speaks to us, touches us. No one whistles. There is more than one kind of freedom, said Aunt Lydia. Freedom to and freedom from. In the days of anarchy, it was freedom to. Now you are being given freedom from. Don’t underrate it (Atwood, 25).

While there are no catcallers in Gilead, the handmaids, and women in general, are still raped. Just in the quiet confines of homes and medical offices. Horrible things still happen to women, they just aren’t reported, because they aren’t allowed to be.

Most people in the United States believe in freedom, but what types of freedom are people working to protect? If we can take any lessons from Gilead, it’s important to acknowledge the things going on in the background. Things that may seem silly, or seem like empty threats, very well may not be someday. Atwood wrote this book with the intent of using events that have already happened in the past. What makes us think they can’t happen again?

DiscussionAnalysis

About the Creator

Ashley Lima

I think about writing more than I write, but call myself a writer as opposed to a thinker.

Enjoyed the story?
Support the Creator.

Subscribe for free to receive all their stories in your feed. You could also pledge your support or give them a one-off tip, letting them know you appreciate their work.

Subscribe For FreePledge Your Support

Reader insights

Outstanding

Excellent work. Looking forward to reading more!

Top insights

  1. Excellent storytelling

    Original narrative & well developed characters

  2. Expert insights and opinions

    Arguments were carefully researched and presented

  3. Eye opening

    Niche topic & fresh perspectives

  1. Heartfelt and relatable

    The story invoked strong personal emotions

Add your insights

Comments (5)

  • Dharrsheena Raja Segarran10 months ago

    How can someone in their right mind say this isn't academic enough? I think they're not academic enough! The audacity to give this a C! Ugh, this really makes my blood boil!

  • Novel Allen11 months ago

    I am thinking this is way past academic enough. Maybe it needed a bit less academic and a bit more you. Who knows, is it the luck of the draw or just who makes the decision that matters, anyway, I would mark it up a tad more.

  • Kendall Defoe 11 months ago

    Not academic enough? Did they mean that it actually made sense? Seriously, please remember that C-students hire B-students to get A-students to clean up after them. C+ definitely... 🤔🙄😐

  • Suze Kay11 months ago

    Ashley, this is 100x better than my 4th-grade book report (!) in which my main takeaway was "Eh, too religious. Boring!." I think your thesis was well-researched, and in the time since it was written has only proven itself more. Gold star from me! Incidentally, I also got a C+ on my thesis lol, but that was because I was trying to invent new art history theory that my expert readers didn't quite buy into :P

  • Mark Gagnon11 months ago

    What a great analogy! I think your professor was a Q-Anon member. Ignoring isn’t ignorance it’s just refusing to acknowledge the facts. Well done, Ashley!

Ashley LimaWritten by Ashley Lima

Find us on social media

Miscellaneous links

  • Explore
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Support

© 2024 Creatd, Inc. All Rights Reserved.