Ph.D. Thesis – J. Zaslow; McMaster University - Philosophy
FEMALE SUBMISSION, RELATIONAL AUTONOMY, AND BELONGING
THE FEMINIST FEMALE SLAVE:
FEMALE SUBMISSION, RELATIONAL AUTONOMY, AND BELONGING
By JOANNA ZASLOW, B.A. [H], M.A.
A Thesis Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy
McMaster University, Copyright © Joanna Zaslow, July 2015
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (2015) (Philosophy)
McMaster University
Hamilton, Ontario
TITLE: The Feminist Female Slave: Female Submission, Relational Autonomy, and Belonging
Author: Joanna Zaslow B.A. [H] (Carleton University), M.A. (McMaster University)
SUPERVISOR: Dr. Elisabeth Gedge
NUMBER OF PAGES: vi, 163
Abstract
This project introduces the case of the Feminist Female Slave [FFS], a female submissive in a BDSM relationship with a male Master. This case is used in order to strengthen discourse in three main areas: feminist relational autonomy, BDSM theory, and feminist community politics. I argue that the FFS offers a case in which feminist autonomy theorists can serve to grow and develop their own approaches in a way that is inclusive of the diversity of women’s sexual expression, as she challenges our narrow notions of female subservience and asks us to rethink what it means to express an autonomous women’s sexuality. In BDSM theory she asks us to reflect upon our reliance upon superficial notions of consent and the lack of space for a critical dialogue, and finally, in feminist politics she asks us to consider what it means to belong to feminist communities, or what it means to feel as if one can lay claim to a feminist identity. Each of these considerations is brought to light in this project because of the interesting balance that the FFS’s relationship holds between her feminist identity, sexual politics, and sexual and romantic practices.
Acknowledgements
To my supervisor, Elisabeth Gedge: thank you for your unconditional support and encouragement. You have made me a stronger, more confident academic, and never sought to limit my academic path. You have supported this unconventional project from day one, and I always felt that you were in my corner, even when we disagreed. Your amazing support is what every PhD student deserves and I am incredibly lucky and honoured to have had the privilege of working with you.
To my readers, Stefan Sciaraffa and Amber Dean: thank you for always encouraging me to think beyond my comfort zone, and for challenging me. Your support has made this project far better than it would have been without either of you.
To my friends and family: To Jen for her always-upbeat and positive influence; To my parents for always encouraging me to dream and shoot for the stars, and for loving me even when I missed; To my sisters for reminding me how to have fun.
Most importantly, to my husband, Josh: thank you for being in my life and for letting me be a part of yours. You mean the world to me.
Table of Contents
Introduction……………………………………………………………..Page 1
Chapter 1: “Autonomy and Submission”...……………………………..Page 12
Chapter 2: “The Feminist Female Slave”..…………………………...…Page 40
Chapter 3: “Feminist Relational Autonomy and Female Submission”…Page 69
Chapter 4: “Autonomy and Consent in BDSM Theory”……..…………Page 91
Chapter 5: “Autonomy, Belonging, and the Value of Feminism”...........Page 128
Conclusion……………………………...……………………………….Page 153
Bibliography……………………………....………………...…………..Page 159
162
Ph.D. Thesis – J. Zaslow; McMaster University - Philosophy
Thesis Introduction
“As long as you wear this collar, you are mine to command. And until I remove it from your neck, I will consider you my responsibility, my possession, my slave”
-Miss Abernathy, Erotic Slavehood (10)
This project focuses on the relationship between autonomy and women’s sexual freedoms, particularly in the case of female sexual submission. Relying on a hypothetical case, I tell the story of a woman who takes on the role of a “slave” to her male “Master” in a consensual, long-term, BDSM relationship, with uneven power dynamics. She is expected to serve her Master, to be at his whims, to put him first in all points in her life. She derives great pleasure from serving him, from meeting his sexual and emotional needs before her own (if hers are met at all). What is important to note in this case (and this case will be outlined with much greater detail in later chapters), is that not only is she a Female Slave, but she is a Feminist Female Slave [FFS]. She identifies as a feminist, and holds that her submissive relationship falls in line with her feminist ideals.
Through the use of this case, I aim to show that both our discussions of female autonomy from a relational account, as well as our discussions of autonomy in BDSM theory, have a blind spot in regards to the characteristics brought up by the FFS. What does it mean for a woman to identify as a feminist while consciously taking a submissive role to their male partner? Does her feminist identification affect our response to her relationship? Does BDSM theory think any external influence can limit our expression of autonomy? Does the dominant method of consent in BDSM theory apply well to relationships like that of the FFS? Does the case of the FFS require us to reconsider our current approaches to female submission? In creating this project, I do not aim to diminish the value or importance of feminist approaches to autonomy, like relational autonomy, but I instead aim to encourage a more fruitful discussion of women’s sexuality, one which expands with the growing diversity of women’s sexual lives and which addresses and acknowledges the real influence of the social sphere in these same sexual practices.
This project serves a double-purpose: to both defend and strengthen our engagement with the feminist submissive. I aim to not only provide a defense for feminist submissives against those who challenge the possibility of their autonomy, but also to advance criticisms of the philosophical justifications they provide when defending their relationships. The first part of this project serves to evaluate the way feminist philosophers have responded to the relationship between autonomy and female submission. I will show that the representation of female submission within these texts is quite narrow, thus limiting the depth of our possible discourse. In order to correct this limitation, I offer the case study of the FFS. This relationship requires the explicit and continual use of the dominant/submissive power structure and is commonly found in the BDSM (Bondage and Discipline, Dominance and Submission, Sadism and Masochism) community[1]. The Master/slave relationship and the Feminist Female Slave found within it provide an alternative discussion of female submission that counteracts the portrayal found in contemporary feminist philosophical discussions of female submission and autonomy.
In the second part of this project, I attempt to strengthen the philosophy that serves the Feminist Female Slave in her BDSM community. I show that BDSM theory offers an individualistic account of autonomy, which fails to take into consideration the concerns raised by feminist philosophers in the first part in their discussion of female submission. Although I argue that feminist philosophers fail to take into account the breadth and diversity of the expression of female submission, the concerns that they raise have not been adequately addressed by contemporary BDSM theories, and remain valuable and necessary contributions. This means that not only do I offer a defense of a feminist submissive, showing how her role can be autonomously chosen; I also provide a way to strengthen her feminist and BDSM philosophy.
Feminist Accounts of Autonomy and Female Submission
Feminist discussions of autonomy and submission frequently make use of case studies that invoke a traditional housewife, whose duty is to serve her husband and place his needs before her own.[2] These cases are common, whether feminist scholars seek to defend her freedom to choose such a role, or to chastise her for falling prey to misogynistic or harmful notions of femininity. Regardless of their conclusions, these discussions represent submissive women narrowly, such that they all share common characteristics. As a result, discussions of the relationship between female submission and autonomy have been restricted to examining a singular form of submission, thus limiting our engagement with the diversity of women’s sexual lives and experiences.
The singular representation of the female submissive in feminist work on autonomy is quite similar to the depiction of traditional housewives. In these discussions, the female submissive is often presented as having: (i) some sort of religious affiliation, (ii) a gendered ideology that all women take (or ought to take) the same subservient role to their male partners, and a (iii) lack of feminist identification (or are anti-feminist)[3]. It would be naïve for me to claim that these characteristics are present in all women who take submissive roles in their relationships. Women’s expression of submission, as with all relationships, takes a variety of forms, with different motivations, expressions, and contexts. However, in spite of diversity in the expression of submission, the representation of female submission in feminist philosophical discussions about female submission is quite limited. Against this tendency, I will introduce the case of the Feminist Female Slave into our discussions of autonomy and submission in order to go beyond the limiting representation of submission as solely concerned with religious, traditional housewives.
Although their representation of submission is homogenous, feminist scholars have varied responses to female submission in general. Sexual and romantic relationships, where women take a submissive role to more dominant male partners have at times been characterized in some philosophical works as problematic, harmful, or even abusive. Texts, including Thomas Hill’s “Servility and Self-Respect”, Sonya Charles’ “How Should Feminist Theorists Respond to the Problem of Internalized Oppression?” and Anita Superson’s “The Deferential Wife Revisited: Agency and Moral Responsibility,” among others, allege that voluntarily subservient women may be lacking in self-respect, are victims of social or individual coercion, or are misinformed about their value and roles as women. It should be noted that even when authors defend the autonomy of submissive women[4], the question of whether submissive or subservient women could be autonomous raises what I call the problem of female submission: due to the influence of patriarchy or other sexist and misogynistic influences in women’s lives, the freedom for women to choose to submit romantically and sexually to a male partner is often distrusted or disbelieved.
It can be difficult for some scholars to imagine that women could truly desire to take on such a role without harmful external influences. However, not all feminist scholars hold this same concern. Authors including Diana Meyers and Andrea Westlund have defended the female submissive in their work on autonomy. In the process of establishing the case of the Feminist Female Slave, this project will bring to light the diversity in response to female submission by feminist scholars. This means that even though I hold that the representation of feminist submission is limited in these discussions, the responses by these scholars still vary. I will show that even when operating from within the same schools of thought, many scholars disagree as to whether or not women can autonomously submit to their male partners. The problem of female submission, then, raises the difficulty scholars have in providing a consistent or clear response to female sexual submission.
The response by feminist philosophers who find female submission to be inevitably coerced or influenced by harmful external forces is a troubling response for submissives like the FFS. For those women who truly desire to be sexually submissive to their partner, the fear of being labeled as a victim of a romantic or sexual partner is distressing. This can be especially difficult for those who take a submissive BDSM role, as even taking a BDSM role is difficult to share with others because it is so far outside mainstream sexual relationships. Added to this concern is the fear by female submissives that they will be viewed as the victim of coercion—that their autonomy has been compromised. This perspective casts suspicion on a woman’s sexual expressions not because of who she is, but because of the role she has chosen. In response to this problem, I aim to indicate ways in which feminist discussions of autonomy can be strengthened through a more thorough engagement with female submission. I argue that examining cases including the Feminist Female Slave allows for the possibility that women could legitimately choose to enter into romantic and sexual relationships where they take a submissive role while their male partner takes a more dominant role. The FFS will assist in my aim to move away from more traditional representations of submissive women in order to provide a more nuanced, diverse representation of women who choose to submit. Primarily, this movement towards a more diverse understanding of female submission will be accomplished through an examination of feminist relational autonomy theorists, and their response to the relationship between female submission and autonomy.
BDSM Theory and Autonomy
While my primary purpose in this project is to defend a more nuanced engagement with female submission, I will simultaneously argue for a more nuanced account of autonomy within BDSM theory. This more nuanced understanding of autonomy is one that the FFS can use to justify her position as a slave, and I argue that it can strengthen the use of autonomy within BDSM communities by accounting for the feminist considerations I outline in Part 1. The Feminist Female Slave is a member of a primarily heterosexual BDSM community and identifies with a feminist perspective that is consistent with the liberal thought that is present in BDSM theory. From this theoretical approach, she defends her role as a slave as one that is consistent with her feminist identification, claiming that she made the decision to become a slave and that her choice was a free one. Her reliance on consent, choice, and free sexual expression is consistent with a broader BDSM approach to sexuality, as well as a liberal approach to sexuality. In this project I argue that her defense of her autonomy (and from this, the BDSM community’s defense of sexual autonomy) ought to incorporate greater discussions of the influence of the social sphere upon our sexual expression, as well as other external influences, in order to ensure that the requirement for autonomy involves more than a mere verbal expression of consent. I will show that these considerations are similar to the feminist accounts of relational autonomy found in Part 1, and will add a much more nuanced understanding of sexual autonomy than what is currently used by the BDSM community and the FFS.