Pateman radically reinterprets these three concepts to show how they are interlinked to maintain male dominance. Her key insight is that modern “freedom” (Contract) didn’t destroy Patriarchy; it just reinvented it.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction: The Transformation of Patriarchy
2. The Concept of Contract (The Tool of Subordination)
3. Property in the Person (The Myth of Ownership)
4. The Sexual Contract and Women as Property
5. Critique of Liberal Capitalism (Welfare & Basic Income)
6. Critical Analysis (Mains/Advanced Perspective)
7. Contemporary Relevance
8. Summary Table
9. Sources

1. Introduction: The Transformation of Patriarchy

• The Myth: Liberal theory claims we moved from Patriarchy (Rule of Fathers/Kings) to Civil Society (Rule of Equal Individuals).
• Pateman’s Correction: We didn’t destroy Patriarchy; we modernized it.
• The Shift:
  • Old Patriarchy: Paternal Right (Based on Status/Blood). The Father ruled because he was the Father.
  • New Patriarchy: Fraternal Right (Based on Contract/Consent). Men rule because they “signed a contract” (Social Contract) that excluded women.
  • Result: Patriarchy is now hidden behind the language of “Freedom” and “Choice.”

2. The Concept of Contract (The Tool of Subordination)

Usually, “Contract” is seen as the opposite of “Slavery.” Pateman argues that Contract is the primary means of creating subordination in the modern world.

• The Logic:
  • In a contract, two “owners” exchange something.
  • However, in specific contracts (Employment, Marriage, Prostitution), one person surrenders obedience to the other.
• Civil Slavery: If I sell myself into slavery for life, is it “freedom” because I signed a contract? No. Pateman argues that contracts involving the body (selling labor/sex) inevitably create a relationship of Command and Obedience, not freedom.
  • “Contract is the specific means by which the subjection of women to men, and workers to capitalists, is constituted.”

3. Property in the Person (The Myth of Ownership)

Pateman attacks the core Liberal idea (from John Locke) that “Every man has a Property in his own Person.”

• The Problem: This idea treats our body like a “thing” (an object) that we own, just like we own a car.
• The Fiction:
  • If my body is a “thing,” I can sell its services (Labor/Sex) without selling myself.
  • Pateman argues this is impossible. You are your body. You cannot separate your “labor power” or “sexual service” from your physical self.
  • Example: When a worker enters a factory, he doesn’t just send his “labor” in; he brings his whole body and mind, which must obey the boss.
• Conclusion: The idea of “Property in the Person” is a political fiction designed to make subordination look like a “free exchange of property.”

4. The Sexual Contract and Women as Property

Pateman applies this to the relationship between men and women.

• Marriage Contract:
  • Historically, this was not a contract between equals. It was a contract where the woman exchanged protection for subjection.
  • It gave the husband “Conjugal Right”—sexual access to the wife’s body (Marital Rape was legally impossible because he “owned” that right).
• Prostitution (The Sex Industry):
  • Defenders call it “Sex Work” (selling a service).
  • Pateman calls it the Sexual Contract. It is the ultimate expression of the “Law of Male Sex-Right.”
  • It affirms the patriarchal belief that men have a right to access women’s bodies as commodities in the market. It is not about “freedom” but about men’s demand for mastery.

5. Critique of Liberal Capitalism (Welfare & Basic Income)

Pateman is also a strong critic of the Capitalist Welfare State.

• The Patriarchal Welfare State:
  • Welfare systems are built on the “Breadwinner Model.”
  • Men get benefits based on their Employment (Pensions/Insurance).
  • Women get benefits based on their Dependency (as wives/widows). This reinforces women’s status as second-class citizens.
• The Solution: Basic Income:
  • Pateman advocates for a Universal Basic Income (UBI).
  • Why? It breaks the link between “Employment” and “Citizenship.” It gives women true independence (The “Power to say No” to abusive husbands or bad bosses) without relying on a man.

6. Critical Analysis (Mains/Advanced Perspective)

Strengths (Merits):

• Deconstruction of Consent: She forces us to question whether “Consent” is always free. If a starving person “consents” to a bad job, or a poor woman “consents” to prostitution, is it freedom or coercion?
• Embodiment: She brought the Body back into political theory. She reminded us that we are not abstract “minds” signing contracts; we are physical beings.

Weaknesses (Critiques):

• Sexual Conservatism? Some feminists argue Pateman’s strong stance against prostitution (viewing it only as domination) ignores the agency of sex workers who choose the profession.
• Too Abstract: Her critique of “Property in the Person” is philosophically brilliant but legally difficult. If we don’t “own” ourselves, who owns us? The State? This could lead to dangerous implications.

7. Contemporary Relevance

1. Surrogacy Markets: Pateman would view commercial surrogacy as the ultimate capitalist form of the Sexual Contract—treating a woman’s womb as “Property” to be rented out.
2. Gig Economy: Uber/Zomato workers are “Independent Contractors.” Pateman would analyze this not as freedom, but as a trick to deny them rights while retaining control (subordination via contract).
3. UBI Debates: Pateman is a leading voice arguing that UBI is a feminist issue, not just an economic one.

8. Summary Table

9. Sources

• Pateman, Carole. The Sexual Contract (1988).
• Pateman, Carole. The Problem of Political Obligation.
• Pateman, Carole. Welfare, Sex, and Basic Income.
• Radin, Margaret Jane. Contested Commodities (Similar views on commodification).