Laura Perrins: Islamism poses the real threat to the sisterhood

The novel, The Handmaid’s Tale by Canadian author Margaret Atwood, has been scaring the bejesus out of women since 1985. I am not going to give you the full summary – you know it. The US becomes a big evil Christian theocracy and after widespread infertility hits, only the few fertile women that are left must become Handmaids to the better families, bearing them children.

Fornication is punished by death, women cannot work and have to be covered and suffer from all round horror at the hands of the patriarchy (and evil conservative women).

The book is everything that feminists want women to believe is 'just around the corner.

What a load of horse manure. Thankfully, the only thing that came into being since 1985 is that we pay for everything electronically. If memory serves me right in the dystopian book the Government transfers unilaterally all the wealth held by women to the bank accounts held by their nearest male relative, something that was easy to do given the lack of cash.

But that does not stop numerous TV adaptations of The Handmaid’s Tale, the latest being this.

The book and adaptations generate many think pieces, warning us that we are just a Trump presidency away from such a theocracy even though Trump is the least socially conservative Republican president ever and the Christian Right was split on his election.

But sure, why should we let the facts get in the way of a good propaganda campaign, especially against Christians? And this book has been the most effective form of propaganda to keep women scared into submission and voting Democrat ever, I do believe.

Because remember – feminism is an industry that keeps a lot of women in jobs that they would not have if their sisters did not labour under the delusion that they are oppressed. Nothing could be further from the truth.

If we look at America we can see that instead of abortion being illegal, the baby killing machine Planned Parenthood is busy butchering unborn babies in their hundreds of thousands, and then selling on their body parts. Fornication is celebrated everywhere and used to sell pretty much everything. Not even the foam finger is sacred.

Women are doing very well in the economic sphere, while 7-10 million men are not in work or looking for work (many sponging off their female partners or mothers).

But as this piece demonstrates, the liberals are too terrified to examine where the real threat to women’s rights comes from.

Tell, me again which extremist ideology executes gay men by throwing them off buildings?

What theocracy demands women must be covered and refuses to let them drive? What girls are at high risk of female genital mutilation? Are they the Mormons and Roman Catholics or hardline Lutherans?

No. The real threat to women’s rights comes from Islamism. But you will be waiting a long time before you read a feminist dystopian novel about the threats to American women from such a theocracy. If you did it would be immediately slammed as Islamophobic.

(Image: Dave Collier)

Laura Perrins

  • Tricia

    You are right. Feminists are either utter cowards or fools beyond measure. I watched an interview on the TV the other day where the presenters were supporting the “right” of a Muslim woman to wear full body cover and veil covering while an Imam was sitting next to her telling her that “nowhere in the Koran is this required and it is a tribal garment”. He also referred to the veil as “a rag” which has nothing to do with the state of her faith.
    I cannot imagine never being able to feel the wind and sun on my arms, legs and face and being suffocated in this all encompassing garment.
    I consider that any young woman who is choosing to wear this garment must be considered a dangerous radical and that the veil should be banned. We do not allow people to go into banks whilst covering their faces and we should not allow these women to hide their identity, whether by choice or coercion.

    • Shazza

      What is never discussed is the deleterious effect of non exposure to sunlight has on the body. It would be very interesting to see stats on rickets, etc. regarding muslim females who totally cover up.

      The question that is never asked of those who wear the burka is that ‘if you believe that you were created by allah why is it that your body is designed to need sunshine to make Vitamin D, and by covering up you are denying the design of your deity?”

      • Bob Marshall

        I think that trying to overcome this kind of brain-washed behaviour by presenting sensible scientific reasons is never going to work.

        I sure as hell don’t know what IS going to work, but this is a non-starter, sorry to say.

        • Shazza

          I’m not too sure. Sadly, none of the MSM/Politicians is brave enough to pose this type of question – we ridicule ‘flat earthers’ etc. and we need to ridicule openly this practice.

          We need a very serious open discussion regarding certain islamic practices including not only this, but FGM etc. as well.

          Slightly OT but sadly it seems Paul Nuttall has blocked the very brave, outspoken true feminist Anne Marie Waters from standing for UKIP in the forthcoming GE.

          • Corblimey

            Just the financial cost needs looking at in detail.;

      • I would like to know how many women in this country who wear a burka are being treated by the NHS for problems relating to vitamin D deficiency.
        That, of course, is in addition to the cost of treating all of those who have issues related to repeated marriages between cousins and other near relatives.

    • Enemy Coast Ahead

      A few years back, a non-practicing Muslim originally from Turkey (living in Britain and married to an English woman) who I happened to be working with once told me why he thought some Muslim women who lived in free western societies still chose to wear this harsh garment. Firstly – vanity hiding low self-esteem – he claimed that many who choose to wear it were very self-conscious of their physical appearance – so by only revealing the face and in some cases only the eyes and covering up everything from head-to-toe in flowing robes it not only helped to hide their physical insecurities but it also gave an air of mystery about them too. Another reason was narcissism – some simply enjoyed the attention it attracts in western society where it was still a fairly uncommon sight unlike the middle east where they are seen everywhere – in fact he told me that most Muslim women who lived in predominantly Islamic countries absolutely loathed this clumsy garment and didn’t understand why those Muslim women who lived in the much freer western societies of Europe would want to continue wearing it when it was not required and not being forced upon them. Lastly – snobbery, for some it is an attempt to convey the message that they take their faith seriously and this therefore makes them superior to everybody else.

      This all come about because we were just chatting at the time during a lunch-hour walk to sandwich bar when we both saw this Muslim woman who was (except for only the eyes) clad from head to toe in this rather uncomfortable-looking black garment on a sweltering hot day in central London – she was having difficulty boarding a bus that was full. I can’t say what he said was completely true or not – I personally have not had a chance to speak to anyone who wears these things – but I did read an article once that sort of backed-up what he said about why some Muslim women living in free western society have chosen to still wear this rather oppressive looking garment.

      Unfortunately we never got round to those women who were probably forced into wearing it.

      • paul parmenter

        Women’s clothing.

        I find it incredible that something that ought to be a straightforward and simple aspect of everyday existence, with no ability of itself to do any harm or to threaten anyone’s life or wellbeing, has managed to become a catalyst for furious arguments, intense courtroom debates, vicious divisions between sexes and races, and outpourings of hatred. I fear that one day women’s clothing will cause an outbreak of war. We don’t seem to be too far off it right now.

        Whether it is short skirts and see-through tops at one extreme, or full-body covering and veils at the other, it has always seemed to have the power to set people at one another’s throats.

        Do we pay too much attention to the supposed symbolism of what women wear?

        • Tricia

          Clothing is not the issue. Lack of means of identity is. I have no problem with a nun wearing a habit and wimple just as I do not have a problem with a hijab or turban.
          It would be better if western society dressed more modestly, but there is certainly no problem with identity – possibly in areas that I would prefer not to see covered in tattoos.
          Saudi women wear a leather face mask, which is scary! And it is ridiculous to be in a restaurant, as happened to me last year, next to two Muslim women – one just wearing a hijab, the other with a face covering. She had to lift it up each time she took a bite of food, so you saw her face anyway!

          • paul parmenter

            Thanks for the comment – but I still don’t get it. I cannot see how clothing is a “means of identity”. But maybe that is just because it has never been that way for me. Perhaps it is very different for women, and hugely different for certain women. But I still think it is a crazy position to get into. Clothing should never identify you.

    • getahead

      Yup, in the west, the veil is a political statement.

      • getahead

        I remember flying back to the UK from the Middle East, as soon as the seat belt sign went off, the young ladies would head for the toilets to get out of their burkhas.

    • WFC


      It is the equivalent of a feminist arguing about a woman’s “right” to wear a chastity belt, or scolds bridle.

  • Craig Martin

    I once wore a dragon suit for a day and went dancing around the streets. Probably not the same, but I loved the anonymity.

    • A female friend of mine had female friends in college that converted to Islam, and that is pretty much what they say.

  • Does anyone know if a woman wearing a burka is allowed to drive? My brother-in law has been stopped from driving because he has restricted sideways vision in one eye. Surely anyone wearing such a garment has very restricted sideways vision.

    Or are they exempt from the rule like Sikhs riding motor cycles who don’t have to wear crash-helmets?

    • Shazza

      I used to live in a large Midlands city and often saw women in full burkas driving.

      • I’m not surprised, as usual I suspect it would be ‘racist’ for the police to take action! If they want to dress as in Saudi, they should also not drive as in Saudi!

        • Shazza

          More ‘amusing’ muslim incidents was watching plod draw up next to a muslim driver chatting away enthusiastically on his mobile while driving and said ‘plod’ studiously avoiding any eye contact with said transgressor…..

          • CRSM

            That doesn’t surprise me.

          • Corblimey

            Does not pay for a young policeman mindful of his future to pay attention to Muslim misdeamours. This is the same in the Gulf where imported Pakistani police and others instinctively know who to ignore and who to question.

    • WFC

      Does anyone know if a woman wearing a burka is allowed to drive?

      Not where it’s compulsory, they can’t.

      • Just as I thought. Muslims only want to use the bits of their religion here that happens to suit them.

  • Timmy

    If planned parenthood is so bad why do I occasionally see pop up ads for it on TCW?

    Make the women afraid so they run to feminism for protection.

    As for men sponging off women , about damn time. Women have be sponging off men for thousands of years.

    • PP is that bad, and worse. Most time, internet ads are not selected by the site owner, which is widely known, and some very goofy things happen. Mentioning PP in an article could well trigger a pop up ad from them, context be darned. Not the least of the reasons I never turn my ad blocker off.

      Women should be afraid of Islamism – not the moderate variety (that is rumored to exist) but the hard core variety we are seeing. Read Laura’s description of “The Handmaid’s Tale” again, because to me it sound much more like Islam than any variety of Christianity I have seen.

      Never heard of a partnership have you? That’s what a proper marriage has always been.

      • CRSM

        I thought that ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’ was a very powerful book, spoiled only by its indeterminate ending. (The film however is execrable).
        Though it is quite obvious that the supposedly hard-line fundamentalist oppressive Christianity in the book, is far more representative of today’s Islamic states.

        I don’t think that Margaret Atwood necessarily intended this, as she may well have thought that a hard-line Christian fundamentalism could take hold in the US. (Note that in the book, all of the European countries were still liberal democracies, it was only the USA that had become a religious totalitarian state.)

        It is however a valid dystopian vision of what an Islamic takeover may well look like.

        • Laura Perrins

          I should say that I liked the book when I read it, and despite her being a feminist I do really like Atwood as a writer. I have read most, though not all of her books. the Blind Assassin was probably my favourite. I also like that other feminist writer, Chimamanda Ngozi Aichie. Very talented.

  • Colkitto03

    If 2017s reality had been presented to the public of 1960 would it have been considered a dystopian future by them?

    Complete undervaluing of marriage (unless it gay marriage)
    Family values undermined
    The BBC just a propaganda tool
    Porn available to every teenager with a mobile phone.
    Christianity undermined and mocked.
    A country covered by CCTV (you are on camera 300 times a day in a city centre)
    Fines for everything from littering to taking your kids out of school in term time.
    Police resources investigating ‘offended people’ on Twitter and facebook
    Students needing safe places while objecting to free speech.
    FGM, Honour killings, forced marriage etc……

    I could go on….

    • Laura Perrins

      I know there really is the dystopia we live in now (which leaving Islamism aside) is bad enough.
      200,000 abortions a year (infant sacrifice), the Sate can semi-permanently sterilise your minor child without parental consent so they continue to be raped by their ‘boyfriend’, buying and selling of children via surrogacy de facto legalised, marriage penalised, single motherhood rewarded. I could go on. Babies and young children murdered by the live-in boyfriend.

      I really wish someone would write a book about that.

      • Colkitto03

        Absolutely agree.
        Society will not talk about the long term after effects of Abortion on women. There will be no public funding for that.
        One day someone will write a bout this, maybe not in our lifetimes

      • Nockian

        “Infant sacrifice” ?

        What’s the ethics here ?

        Abortion of a non viable foetus isn’t sacrifice. A foetus is not yet a functioning human being and has no rights. It is the mother that must bear the child to birth and for ever after. It would be the mother that would be called to sacrifice, she is an existent human being, the foetus is only a potential human being.

        Certainly this procedure should not be regarded in the same sense as throwing away some unwanted shoes; but neither should it be regarded as infanticide. It shouldn’t be available on the NHS except in very specific circumstances-this would reduce the moral hazard which results from free abortions on demand without penalty.

  • Hugh_Oxford

    Thank you, Laura, for your marvellous, countercultural contribution on BBC Radio 4 today. Thank you for speaking truth to power so eloquently.

    I can’t remember, in years of listening to the BBC’s output, such a succinct condemnation and exposure of the failure of the post-Christian, sexually amoral society; the threat it poses to the most vulnerable and the sheer misery it causes. And thank you for reminding us about the power of the Christian revolution to elevate our lives, and what we owe to it.

    I hope and pray that we will hear much, much more of you.

    • Laura Perrins

      Thank you so much for this. I really appreciate it – it made my evening. I (kind of) hate doing those things sometimes – but feel if I don’t it is complete surrender. Glad there was one happy listener. I am off to watch over my 3 children that I somehow managed to produce without visiting a sex exhibition at a museum…..

      • Colkitto03

        Keep it up Laura, there are multiple millions who appreciate your message. We dont have the Fox news or Talk Radio in this country to represent or speak for us.

        • WFC

          We do have Brietbart London, though:

        • Thomas Katz

          We do have LBC but they give airtime to one of the most sanctimonious and unsavoury presenters known, James O’Brian

      • WFC

        Just remember that your audience is the people listening: not the pursed lipped BBC zealots, inquisitors, witch-finders general “interviewers” and “moderators”.

        • Colkitto03

          When anyone meets the MSM rthey should remember this quote from Peggy Noonan :’Beware
          the politically obsessed. They are often bright and interesting, but
          they have something missing in their natures; there is a hole, an empty
          place, and they use politics to fill it up. It leaves them somehow

      • Hugh_Oxford

        Well, there’s an inverse relationship between sexualisation and procreation… wester societies haven’t had enough children to replace ourselves since the sex rev.

        I’ve put myself in the public eye to defend the nature and purpose of marriage and the right to life. I hated doing those things too, we shouldn’t have to do these things, but then if we don’t our children won’t have a society fit to live in.

        • CRSM

          But we should have accepted the fact that a reduction in the population of the country would eventually be a good thing. A UK population of less than 50 million would give an increased quality of life for most of us.
          Instead of this, successive governments have not considered how to cope with the transient (two generations or so) phenomena of a heavily age-skewed populace, but instead have taken what they must have thought as the easy way out, by encouraging, even bribing, large numbers of younger people to immigrate here, even when it was apparent that this was causing deep fractures in our society.

  • B jams

    Loved the piece on radio 4 earlier today! We were on a long car journey and the moment it started our ears pricked up. Normally, our son is too engrossed in a book, or on his iPad to notice what’s happening in the front of the car, but pretty quickly he too was roaring with laughter…
    I particularly liked the fantastically random reference to children not knowing who W. Churchill is, but my son was more amused by the many emphatic claims about the gentle, humanitarian, nature of Christianity – though he found it somewhat at odds with the links between the church and slavery that he is reading about at school at the moment, not to mention the revelations over the child abuse in Catholic institutions the world over. But you know, education, it’s all just bollocks, so what does he know. Anyway, please keep up the good work because we all need something to laugh about in these dark days.

    • Phil R

      “education, it’s all just bollocks”

      So it would seem.

  • Dominic Stockford


  • PierrePendre

    What theocracy demands women must be covered….


    that would be Roman Catholicism (nuns) and the Amish. It’s not so long ago that British women of all classes wore hats or headscarfs in public and continued to do so more recently still to attend church. They still do at weddings. Upper class women and brides wore veils (even if they were vestigial) into the ’50s. The convention of women being obliged to hide their hair was never confined to Islam and always had the same purpose of assexualising them.

    • Corblimey

      Oh dear! We used to decapitate as well at least up untl the 17 century.
      What about virginity belts as well?

  • Corblimey

    Why not get all our 6th form girls to experience life as a Muslim woman, for a week? Should teach them something.

  • Thomas Katz

    “Islamism poses the real threat to the sisterhood
    It also poses a threat to all British Values, take Halal?Kosher slaughter for instance, I’ve never met anyone that agrees with it, yet places like “Subway” embrace it, and “We” unknowingly purchase and eat it everywhere because the Government will not make Tesco and the like label it as food only fit for Savages

  • Nockian

    Clear case of the false alternative. We should reject all forms of mysticism, or its socialistic derivatives.

    It’s amazing that otherwise rational people still talk about religion as if it’s based on reality. The reason we need free speech is to expose the irrational to the light of reason.

    In a self confident and rational society, mysticism and Neo-mysticism should die out. The only reason we are talking of the danger of political Islam vs a Christian orthodoxy, is because, through state indoctrination the people have been systematically deprived of the tools to defeat these dead end philosophies.

    The greatest danger we face is that we refuse to hold reason and logic as absolutes and have fallen backwards towards the embrace of a new dark age. One only need see Antifada thugs dressed in black shutting down free speech as heretical, to know we have fallen far enough for western civilisation to cease to exist-I definitely do not wish to be left with choosing between Christianity and some other kind of death cult. The experience of Communism should have purged our hunger for dogma of all kinds. We don’t need any of them ta very much.