Yes, they are. They seem to be more restricted than men (although this might just be an instinctive 1950s/60s idea that they wouldn't be outside the home rather than carefully considered SF). But everyone is very restricted, and apart from renegade groups like the smugglers almost everything is feudal. It seems that Duke Leto is better than the Baron Harkonnen because he's a nicer man, not because he comes from a better system. The Dune world is a pretty bleak place to live in.
It is subtle, but it is stated in
Dune that House Atreides are expert in propaganda and push the idea that the Duke is 'good' - in response and contrast to the previous Harkonnens. This is politics, you are the opposite of your enemy, Atreides is trying to capture anti-Harkonnen sentiment.
But is Duke Leto really a good man? To a certain extent he certainly seems so - but some of it is certainly calculated. He's playing for power for his house. The Emperor knows this. Everyone knows this. That's why he decides to walk into a trap. He takes a gamble that he's got enough time to organise his new 'desert power'. He does not know that he never did have any time.
Yes, the starting society is essentially feudal, so fighting men are in charge, and their women are largely sidetracked (See Princess Irulan, for example). Yet, the Bene Gesserit are extremely successful at what they do and they seem able to manipulate the houses and the Emperor with relative ease in order to attain their own goals. Later when God Emperor Leto II is in charge he destroys this whole structure and uses his fish guards rather than men to maintain absolute control.
I got the feeling that, as the Dune books went on, a certain pseudoscientific crankiness crept in, some of it vaguely New Age, which put me off. I don't want to get into one of those pointless "is it SF" arguments, but I found it increasingly difficult to take it seriously as SF. And in the ones I read, the stories did indeed get worse: more waffle, less plot.
And the sex stuff started to all feel a bit like Barbarella, but less entertaining.
My take on the 'sex stuff' in Dune. Firstly it's been a while since I last re-read all the six main books, but I've read them all a few times, and I didn't really notice these elements.
However, there are some cringe and clunky lines in the book, and I see them in three ways.
- Some lines are cringe because Golden Age SF and erotica never got on. Possibly because SF evolved from ripping yarns for juveniles. Hence putting more adult themes in mainstream SF at the time meant putting in clunky indirect cringe. By the 80s and 90s when mainstream SF new authors started putting in actual 'direct' sex scenes, authors like Peter F. Hamilton, were still getting some degree of resistance from SF readers. Herbert came just as things were changing a little bit, but probably felt more pressure to conform to earlier standards.
- He's having fun. The longer the series goes on, I do feel there is a degree of playfulness - not just with sex, but with some lines that are clearly jokes. Perhaps Herbert did indeed feel that his discourses on power and the future of humanity needed a bit of lightening up. The appearance of the old couple at the end of
Chapterhouse Dune, for example, which on one level are likely face dancers who broke control of their masters, are, on another level, Frank Herbert and his wife and also the most egregious bit of meta-playfulness.
- The various boasts that the women of the Honoured Matres and Bene Gesserit make about their sexual powers. By the end of the series, these two factions are the main groups left. Superwomen battling for control of humanity. I see their colourful boasts of their control of men via sex
1) a logical extension of their actual abilities - they could control the biochemistry of their bodies via thought, trained their bodies to superhuman levels for fighting - the weirding way, control people just using the voice, and a host of other physical and mental abilities.
2) a hyper-realisation of current trends. Herbert, I think, was looking backwards at people like Hitler, Stalin and Mussolini - and no doubt Nixon in the later 70s. But just look at the autocratic men and leaders in todays world, who are usually portrayed as virile and very masculine, who have beautiful trophy wives and have power over the opposite sex, having numerous mistresses/lovers etc. I shall refrain from talking about current Politics, but I'm sure we can all name, easily, a leaders and ex-leaders all over the world that fall into this camp.