How Does the Treatment of Women Compare Between King Lear and The Handmaid's Tale?

Nala Cyriac

Mr. Cohen

ENG4U

October 21st, 2025

How Does the Treatment of Women Compare Between King Lear and The Handmaid's Tale?

Despite the nearly four hundred-year time difference, the stories of King Lear and The Handmaid’s Tale share many similarities in their depictions of the role of women in society. Initial ideas presented through classical tales such as Shakespeare’s are expanded upon in Atwood’s dystopian novel, exploring their ramifications in a world where much of our societal progress has been diminished, highlighting a return to extremist religious attitudes. King Lear presents women in a negative light, diminishing their value and dismissing their strength, reflecting the widely accepted beliefs of the time. The Handmaid’s Tale takes historical context and applies it to the world of Gilead, reducing women to their sole important attribute: their womb, while keeping them submissive under an oppressive system. By comparing the two texts and highlighting their respective contexts, the similarities between the two become apparent, highlighting the origin of beliefs that have the power to repress nearly half the population when under the control of a party willing to enforce them.

In King Lear, women are portrayed as the driving force for the suffering in the play. Their perceived villainy as well as common beliefs at the time highlight the generally accepted ideas about women. In the first Act, during Lear’s division of the kingdom amongst his daughters, when Lear perceived Cordelia’s lack of flattery as an insult, he was enraged, leading to him disowning her and refusing to pay her dowry, followed by a curse upon her womanhood. 

Suspend thy purpose if thou dids’t intend to make this creature fruitful. Into her womb convey sterility. Dry up in her the organs of increase, and from her derogate body never spring a babe to honor her. If she must teem, create her child of spleen, that it may live and be a thwart disnatured torment to her (1, 4, 262).

It is clear that in this moment, Lear would wish to strip his daughter of anything meaningful: her status, now no longer a member of the royal family; her dowry, implying her worthlessness; and finally, her only purpose: childbirth. The word “purpose” is important, as it highlights women’s insignificance, with their only merit being their ability to create future generations. Additionally, Lear uses the word "woman" itself as a negative adjective to refer to weakness or fragility. “Touch me with noble anger. And let not women’s weapons, water drops, stain my man’s cheeks!” (2, 4, 267) While not technically an aside, this quotation in the midst of dialogue depicts Lear reminding himself to behave the way he is expected to, showing how even he is embarrassed to admit that he succumbed to womanly emotions. The description of tears being weapons of women relates to the harm that this display of weakness would have for men, considering they were expected to be pillars of courage and strength. We witness societal expectations affect the actions of the characters within the play when Albany realizes Goneril’s true intentions, proclaiming his desire to harm her but restraining himself due to her gender. 

See thyself, devil! Proper deformity shows not in the fiend so horrid as in woman. [...] Thou changèd and self-covered thing, for shame! Bemonster not thy feature. Were’t my fitness to let these hands obey my blood, they are apt enough to dislocate and tear thy flesh and bones. Howe’er thou art a fiend, a woman’s shape doth shield thee. (4, 2, 62)

Albany’s restraint reflects the common view of women as the ‘weaker sex,’ where men believe it is unfair to harm them, as they possess a significant physical disadvantage. The phrase “howe’er thou art a fiend, a woman’s shape doth shield thee” implies an idiom: a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Coming from a combination of ancient fables and the Bible, reflecting the idea of a seemingly harmless, insignificant thing revealing itself to be dangerous or deceitful. This comparison further highlights the dismissal of women, with it coming as a shock to find that they are capable of greatness, good or evil. Considering the significance of religion at the time, ancient biblical stories typically inspired the thinking of the time, with morals being discovered from the teachings within the Bible. The story of Adam and Eve, where Eve exposed humanity to sin, was the reason for society collectively punishing women for the sins of the First. The depth of their subjugation came as a result of Puritan ideas, an extremist form of Protestantism, popularized by the reign of King Henry VIII, who died shortly before Shakespeare’s lifetime. Additionally, much of the story comes through dialogue between a male and female character, with many instances highlighting their inferiority. This undeniable presentation of women emphasizes the commonality of these beliefs, showing how they were widely accepted by the public. Phyllis Rackin, an English professor at the University of Pennsylvania and former president of the Shakespeare Association, reflected on the influence of societal beliefs in Shakespeare’s plays in a journal published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.

No woman is the protagonist in a Shakespearean history play. Renaissance gender role definitions prescribed silence as a feminine virtue, and Renaissance sexual mythology associated the feminine with body and matter as opposed to masculine intellect and spirit. [...] Within that historical record, women had no voice. The women who do appear are typically defined as opponents and subverters of the historical and historiographic enterprise—in short, as anti-historians. But Shakespeare does give them a voice—a voice that challenges the logocentric, masculine historical record. (329)

By defining the social expectations during that time, she reflects how Shakespeare’s portrayal of women as anything other than quiet and obedient shows a rebellious nature within his characters that outrages the others. 

Though today’s society has evolved from these limiting beliefs, Atwood’s dystopia highlights a return to these “traditional values” (7) when modern ways have seemingly failed. Despite the suffocating views of the world they now inhabit, Atwood instills her novel with defiance, providing glimpses of the ways women fight back against oppression. With the ability to bear children becoming rare, capability is coveted, and society moulds itself around continuing the population. “No woman in her right mind, these days, would seek to prevent a birth, should she be so lucky as to conceive.” (38) In defining women by their ability to bear children, they colour-code them to highlight their role, with the red Handmaids being the rare few able to conceive. At the Red Centre, where viable women are transformed into the dutiful servants, their superiors drill sympathy into them by presenting them as the ‘chosen few,’ referring to all others as “defeated” (51). Additionally, it emphasizes a return to a patriarchal system, where powerful men, known as Commanders, hold the power, being the only ones that truly have knowledge of the outside world. During a Prayvaganza, a mass wedding ceremony for the daughters of Wives, the presiding Commander describes the ways girls will learn to obey the new expectations of society. “Let the women learn in silence with all subjection.” (255) These beliefs are similar to those found in extremely conservative religions. In an article written for the Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion, the oldest academic Feminist journal regarding religious studies, author Maria José Rosado-Nunes examines the possible reasons for women’s participation in these religions, despite their limiting views.

One possible answer is that women invest in religion because, at least in part, religion is in their favor. It is because women get some benefits, spiritual ones of course, but also those of a more practical character. In other words, women make so many efforts for the sake of religion because religion has a positive effect for them. (86)

In some ways, women would be able to manipulate oppressive systems to provide themselves comfort. As the Republic of Gilead places so much emphasis on the importance of women for the purpose of childbearing that they nearly worship them for their ability, protecting viable wombs at all costs, it can also be exploited to their advantage. “A rat in a maze is free to go anywhere, as long as it stays inside the maze” (190). Though Offred reflects on how her role affects her idea of self-worth. “We are containers; it’s only the insides of our bodies that are important” (110). The metaphor describing their limited personal value diminishes all individuality by defining them solely by their ‘purpose.’ She later expands on this with the finality of her statement; emphasizing the bleak, dehumanizing way in which they were brainwashed to think. “We are two-legged wombs, that’s all: sacred vessels, ambulatory chalices” (157). Despite the depressing nature of the subject and the demoralizing references to women as objects, Atwood includes brief glimpses of hope, referring to the ways women fought against oppression in the past. Within the very system, the role of a Commander’s wife shows the possibility of a woman rising to a position of power, but even in the lower levels, women assert control in minor ways, showing their resilience and a rebellion against societal norms. After Moira’s escape, we see how that possibility inspired the remaining women, allowing them to view their situation and captors in a new light. 

Moira had power now, she’d been set loose, she’d set herself loose. She was now a loose woman. I think we found that frightening. [...] In the light of Moira, the Aunts were less fearsome and more absurd. Their power had a flaw to it. (154) 

Moira’s defiance showed the others their true power, exposing the “flaw” in the authority of the Aunts. While the women absorb the teachings at the Centre, they maintain hope through glimpses of areas they can manipulate. “Then I find I'm not ashamed after all. I enjoy the power; power of a dog bone, passive but there” (25). Exercising control where possible allows them to shift the power dynamics and realize their importance. The stream of consciousness narration style, coming from the perspective of our protagonist, trapped within this oppressive system, adds an additional rebellious aspect to the story. In a world where men are supposed to be dictating the events, this retelling from a woman’s perspective shows the subjugation and forceful measures used to maintain their system. Writing this story while living in West Berlin, a country strictly controlled by the Soviet Union, Atwood witnessed the dark side of extreme government control, with methods in her novel intended to parallel the reality she witnessed during this similarly oppressive time. Through the lens of a suppressed person, she highlights the reality, showing how without these perspectives, our view of history would be clouded with bias. It is examples such as journal entries or the tales of survivors that paint a more representative picture of the past, allowing us to view both sides of the story instead of solely the version of history we want to hear.  

Offred’s description of Gilead parallels the traditional religious views regarding the role of women in society seen in Shakespeare’s plays. However, despite Offred labelling herself as passive and submissive, she refuses to fully give in to the societal changes, fighting to retain her personal values beneath a mask of obedience. A similar rebellion is seen when examining Lear’s daughters, who fail to conform to societal expectations, leading them to be cast as villains. As previously examined, Lear’s behaviour towards Cordelia in the first Act highlights the purpose of women as vessels for childbirth and growing the population.

Suspend thy purpose if thou dids’t intend to make this creature fruitful. Into her womb convey sterility. Dry up in her the organs of increase, and from her derogate body never spring a babe to honor her. If she must teem, create her child of spleen, that it may live and be a thwart disnatured torment to her (1, 4, 262).

However, it is significant to mention the idea of a child “honouring” the mother, as this idea is seen in The Handmaid’s Tale, where the ability to become pregnant and bear children is representative of one’s value, with their red attire literally separating them from the crowd. 

As we wait in our double line, the door opens and two more women come in, both in the red dresses and white wings of the Handmaids. One of them is vastly pregnant; her belly, under her loose garment, swells triumphantly. [...] She's a magic presence to us, an object of envy and desire, we covet her. She's a flag on a hilltop, showing us what can still be done: we too can be saved (29).

Both texts convey the belief that childbirth is a gift and a privilege. Atwood presents the idea in a very literal way, with it being so coveted that it inspires feelings of envy from the other women, whereas Shakespeare highlights it as a woman’s sole purpose, and by such definition, it renders sterile women as useless. Despite the differences of perspectives between the two texts, they both convey the same idea: that women’s only purpose is to bear children, and this ability gives them honour. Lear clearly states this by wishing the gods strip his daughter of all purpose, as he now considers her worthless, wanting the world to perceive her similarly. Alternatively, Atwood’s female perspective highlights the disparity between societies’ beliefs and how the women view themselves. Having been stripped of all autonomy, women in Atwood’s world serve singular purposes and thus exploit what little power they have to regain some semblance of control. We witness this on several occasions: early on, with Offred taunting the guards who have not yet been permitted to touch women; then again, with the gloating pride of the pregnant woman; and finally, with Offred’s mental exploration of the potential for violence that others’ weakness has given her.  “I could burn the house down. Such a fine thought, it makes me shiver. An escape, quick and narrow” (241). All of these moments provide the idea of power, inspiring hope as small cracks in the system allow opportunities for the suppressed to seize power. Additionally, the violence presented in her thoughts highlights the desires that suppression breeds, with the thought of it almost pleasurable. “I think about the blood coming out of him, hot as soup, sexual, over my hands” (162). Lear’s daughters portray similar gratification through violent action, delightedly suggesting they gouge out both eyes of a servant. “One side will mock another—th’ other too” (3, 7, 70). Their behaviour, defying all social norms, causes them to be described as “Tigers, not daughters” (4, 2, 39). The comparative language used in both texts emphasizes their differing perspectives: with the simile in The Handmaid’s Tale presenting violence as a liberating act, whereas the characters around the daughters perceive them as monstrous, using a metaphor to compare them to predators. History is so often tainted by the biases of the time; hence, experts thoroughly dissect classical literature and art for a modern interpretation. Due to the prevailing beliefs surrounding women at the time, Goneril and Regan are considered greedy for their ambition to seize power. Their rebellion and failure to adhere to societal norms causes them to be villainized, which is sadly true for anything that society deems abnormal, even to this day. Yet in an article published by Wayne State University Press encouraging critical debate, the author argues the sanity of the daughters and their inflated villainy. 

If we can shed 300 years of viewing Goneril and Regan as simply demonic figures in a morality pattern—the Evil Sisters—we could better appreciate, if not the kindliness of their remarks, at least the sanity of them. (Arnold, 210) 

While noting how they may not be the kindest individuals, the outlandishness of their ambition for the time caused them to be overly criticized. Thankfully, in the time since King Lear was written, women’s fight for equality has allowed society to realize the injustice faced by previous generations. Atwood’s world of Gilead emphasizes many of the oppressive tactics used in the past, offering glimpses of hope through subtle defiance, proving that even through adversity, women will not go down without a fight.

In conclusion, the depictions of women in Shakespeare’s King Lear compared to The Handmaid’s Tale prove Atwood’s historical inspiration in the way she portrayed her oppressive system. Through the comparative ways in which each story portrays women’s fight against societal expectations, their differing perspectives highlight the way we perceive the characters. Shakespeare’s world highlighted the belief in women as a ‘weaker sex,’ with their only purpose being their unique ability to bear children—summarizing their value by this act. It also rarely presents women as capable of anything other than childbirth, expecting them to be meek and passive. When Lear’s two daughters disrupt this norm, portraying typically ‘masculine’ traits, they are demonized. In The Handmaid’s Tale, we witness similar limiting views regarding a woman’s purpose, dictated by the necessity to grow the population in this time of crisis, imbedded with an important aspect of rebellion. Finally, in comparing the societal beliefs implied by the two texts, the historical context that inspired Atwood’s novel becomes clear, using a female perspective to prove that women are not simply “two-legged wombs” and the harm of that philosophy. 

Works Cited

Arnold, Judd. “How Do We Judge King Lear?” Criticism, vol. 14, no. 3, 1972, pp. 207–26., JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/23099018. Accessed 24 October 2025.

Atwood, Margaret. The Handmaid's Tale. McClelland & Stewart, 2011.

Avishai, Orit. “A GENDER LENS ON RELIGION.” Gender and Society, vol. 29, no. 1, 2015, pp. 5–25., JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/43669940. Accessed 24 October 2025.

“Phyllis Rackin - Department of English.” University of Pennsylvania, https://www.english.upenn.edu/people/phyllis-rackin. Accessed 22 October 2025.

Rosado-Nunes, Maria José. “Religious Authority and Women’s Religious Experience.” Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion, vol. 19, no. 2, 2003, pp. 85–92., JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/25002478. Accessed 24 October 2025.

Shakespeare, William, and SparkNotes. King Lear: No Fear Shakespeare Deluxe Student Editions - Shakespeare Side-By-Side Plain English. Barnes & Noble, Incorporated, 2020.