Female Sexuality and Autonomy

The Wooing Scene (Act 1, Scene 1)

The Duchess woos Antonio in scene that inverts early modern gender conventions—she initiates, pursues, proposes, while he hesitates and protests his unworthiness. “This is flesh and blood, sir, / ’Tis not the figure cut in alabaster / Kneels at my husband’s tomb” establishes her living, desiring body against the cold stone monument widows were expected to become. “Flesh and blood” emphasizes sensuality, warmth, vitality—she’s alive and sexual, not preserved relic. The contrast with “alabaster” (stone used for tomb sculptures) rejects being monumentalized or objectified in chaste widow role. She then commands “I do here put off all vain ceremony / And only do appear to you a young widow / That claims you for her husband”—stripping away class markers (“vain ceremony”) to assert shared humanity. “Claims” is remarkably active verb—she takes traditionally male role of pursuing and possessing, while Antonio becomes object claimed. Webster writes this in blank verse, granting the Duchess linguistic dignity usually reserved for male characters, and Cariola witnesses as legal marriage—legitimizing their union even as it remains secret.

Sexual Joy and Domestic Intimacy (Act 3, Scene 2)

The brief domestic scene before Ferdinand’s intrusion shows the Duchess and Antonio’s sexual and emotional intimacy. She jokes playfully—“When were we so merry?”—and they banter affectionately. This joyful sexuality contrasts with her brothers’ obsessive horror at her desire. Webster presents their relationship as healthy, loving, productive (they have children)—not sinful or shameful. The Duchess’s question “Why should only I, / Of all the other princes of the world, / Be cased up like a holy relic?” articulates gendered double standard with clarity: male rulers enjoy sexual freedom while she’s expected to be “cased up” (imprisoned, sealed away) like religious object—worshipped but lifeless. The metaphor of “holy relic” is bitterly ironic: her brothers want to preserve her as sacred object while simultaneously obsessing over her sexuality with distinctly unholy fixation.

Ferdinand’s Sexualized Violence (Act 3, Scene 2)

Ferdinand’s invasion of the Duchess’s bedchamber with poniard (dagger) is violent and sexually charged. He enters her private space—bedroom, traditionally female domain where sexuality happens—and threatens to kill her and Antonio “in you, or in myself,” conflating bodies in disturbing way. His obsessive focus on her body and sexuality throughout the play suggests incestuous desire critics have extensively analyzed: “That body of hers, / While that my blood ran pure in’t, was more worth / Than that which thou wouldst comfort, called a soul” reduces her to body (not person) that somehow contained his blood (confused notion of shared aristocratic blood or displaced desire for sexual union?). His command that she never marry—“I would have you to give o’er these chargeable revels: / A visor and a mask are whispering rooms / That breed lust”—reveals paranoid obsession with controlling her sexuality. The phallic poniard and bedroom invasion literalize sexual politics: male violence as penetration and domination of female sexual autonomy.

The Brothers’ Horror at Her Sexuality (Throughout)

Both Ferdinand and the Cardinal express horror at the Duchess’s remarriage in explicitly sexual terms. The Cardinal calls it “ignominious match” and Ferdinand imagines her in “some act of shame”—their language sexualizes and shames her. Ferdinand’s imagination runs to grotesque sexual scenarios: “Happily with some strong-thighed bargeman, / Or one o’th’wood-yard that can quoit the sledge / Or toss the bar”—obsessively picturing her with working-class men in athletic, physical terms suggesting jealous erotic fascination. His lycanthropy (madness where he believes he’s wolf) after her death has been read psychoanalytically as displaced sexual predation—he wanted to possess her sexually, destroyed her when he couldn’t, then goes mad from guilt and unfulfilled desire. Webster shows male obsession with female sexuality as pathological and destructive, yet also as structural feature of patriarchy that claims ownership of women’s bodies.

Blanche’s Sexual History as Weapon (Scene 7)

Stanley investigates Blanche’s past and reveals it to Stella (while Blanche bathes innocently offstage, singing) as evidence of her unworthiness. He recounts: “Sister Blanche is no lily! ... She moved to the Flamingo! ... The Flamingo was used to all kinds of goings-on. But even the management of the Flamingo was impressed by Dame Blanche! ... This party that she moved to ... a second-class hotel which has the advantage of not interfering in the private social life of the personalities there! The Flamingo and Tarantula Arms! ... They pulled in the town line, but finally told her to get out.” Stanley’s sneering tone and euphemistic language (“goings-on,” “private social life”) barely disguise that he’s calling Blanche a prostitute. Her sexual history—seeking connection with strangers after Allan’s suicide—becomes proof of moral corruption that disqualifies her from respectability. Williams exposes sexual double standard: Stanley judges Blanche harshly for behavior far less predatory than his own (he’s cheated on pregnant Stella, will rape Blanche). Yet his working-class masculinity and male gender protect him while her femininity and loss of class status make her vulnerable to judgment.

Blanche’s Explanation to Mitch (Scene 9)

When Mitch confronts her about her past, Blanche explains: “After the death of Allan—intimacies with strangers was all I seemed able to fill my empty heart with.” This links her sexuality directly to trauma—Allan’s suicide created void she tried to fill through physical connection. “Strangers” emphasizes that these weren’t relationships but desperate attempts at human contact. “Seemed able” suggests compulsion rather than pleasure—she didn’t know other way to cope with grief and guilt. Williams presents her sexuality compassionately as psychological symptom of trauma, yet the play shows this explanation doesn’t excuse her in eyes of men who judge her. Mitch’s response—“You’re not clean enough to bring in the house with my mother”—uses contamination metaphor: Blanche’s sexual experience has polluted her, making her untouchable. The Madonna/whore binary is explicit—Mitch wanted to marry her when he thought she was pure; now she’s revealed as sexual, she’s unfit for his mother’s presence. Williams exposes how patriarchy weaponizes female sexuality: women must be virgins or they’re worthless.

The Young Man Scene (Scene 5)

Blanche flirts with and kisses teenage newspaper boy, saying “You make my mouth water” before sending him away with “Now run along, now, quickly!” This brief scene shows Blanche’s active desire and also her awareness that acting on it is transgressive (he’s young; she has date with Mitch soon). “Mouth water” is sensual metaphor—appetite, hunger, physical response. The scene complicates audience response: is this Blanche’s sexuality as predatory (he’s teenager)? Or is it showing her desperate need for validation that any male attention temporarily fulfills? Williams refuses simple judgment—Blanche is both sympathetic (traumatized, seeking connection) and problematic (lies, inappropriate desire). Her sexuality is neither purely victimized nor purely autonomous but complex response to impossible circumstances.

Stanley’s Rape as Ultimate Punishment (Scene 10)

Stanley rapes Blanche after destroying her hopes (telling Stella about her past, ensuring Mitch abandoned her, revealing Shep Huntleigh delusion is fantasy). His line “We’ve had this date with each other from the beginning!” frames rape as inevitable conclusion to their conflict. “Date” euphemizes sexual violence as social engagement; “from the beginning” removes his agency/responsibility—rape culture logic that it was “going to happen anyway.” Stanley sees Blanche’s sexuality (her flirtation, her past) as invitation or justification: she’s sexual, therefore she wants him, therefore rape isn’t rape but mutual climax of sexual tension. Williams exposes this ideology clearly—nothing Blanche did justifies Stanley’s violence. Her sexuality throughout the play (seeking connection, performing desirability to attract Mitch) never consented to Stanley. The rape is punishment for her autonomy (criticizing him, rejecting his authority) enacted through sexual violence—patriarchy’s ultimate weapon against female autonomy. Williams shows rape as ideological and structural, not just individual crime.

Institutionalization as Punishment for Sexuality (Scene 11)

Blanche’s removal to psychiatric institution represents final punishment for her sexual autonomy. Stella and Eunice deny the rape happened—“I couldn’t believe her story and go on living with Stanley” (Stella); “Don’t ever believe it. Life has got to go on” (Eunice). Blanche is labeled insane rather than raped, her testimony invalidated by framing her as unreliable mentally ill woman. Williams shows how patriarchy uses psychiatric diagnosis to silence women: inconvenient female sexuality is medicalized as pathology. Blanche’s “promiscuity” (her sexual history) is treated as symptom of mental illness; her accusation of rape is treated as delusion. The Doctor and Matron remove her “gently” but forcibly—modern violence doesn’t look like Ferdinand’s torture but it’s equally coercive. She’ll be indefinitely institutionalized, her sexuality controlled through medical authority rather than moral condemnation, but control is same. Williams exposes mid-century psychiatric practice as tool of patriarchal control over female sexuality.

Similarities

• 1Female sexuality triggers male violence: Both the Duchess’s remarriage and Blanche’s sexual history threaten male authority, leading to violent responses. Ferdinand cannot accept the Duchess controlling her own sexuality; Stanley cannot accept Blanche’s presence and history challenging his domestic authority. Both use violence (execution; rape) to reassert dominance and punish female autonomy.
• 2Sexual double standards: Both plays expose how men judge women’s sexuality by standards they don’t apply to themselves. Ferdinand obsesses over the Duchess’s sexuality while keeping mistresses himself; the Cardinal has Julia as mistress while condemning the Duchess’s marriage. Stanley judges Blanche’s sexual history while cheating on Stella and raping Blanche. Male sexuality is acceptable or invisible; female sexuality is threatening and must be controlled.
• 3Surveillance of female sexuality: Both heroines are watched constantly. Bosola spies on the Duchess, discovering her pregnancy and reporting to Ferdinand. Stanley investigates Blanche’s past, questioning her every move, examining her belongings. Male surveillance polices female sexuality, discovering secrets that men then weaponize against women.
• 4Sexuality as autonomy: For both women, claiming sexual autonomy is claiming selfhood. The Duchess’s “I am Duchess of Malfi still” includes her right to choose sexual partner. Blanche’s “I don’t want realism, I want magic!” includes right to romantic fantasy and aesthetic self-presentation. Both assert that their sexuality belongs to them, not to men who claim authority over them.

Differences

• 1Joyful vs. traumatized sexuality: The Duchess’s sexuality is healthy, joyful, within loving marriage—Webster validates it as virtue. Blanche’s sexuality is compulsive response to trauma—Williams psychologizes it as symptom. This reflects shift from early modern acceptance that female sexual desire exists (though must be controlled) to modern psychoanalytic pathologizing of female sexuality outside proper channels.
• 2Vindication vs. pathologization: Webster ultimately vindicates the Duchess—her marriage was virtuous love, her brothers’ response was evil, she’s remembered heroically. Williams doesn’t vindicate Blanche—society pathologizes her as mentally ill, she’s institutionalized and forgotten. The Duchess is martyred for her virtue; Blanche is diagnosed for her deviance. This reflects shift from moral frameworks (virtue vs. sin) to medical frameworks (normal vs. pathological).
• 3Visible punishment vs. invisible control: The Duchess is murdered—spectacular, visible, condemnable as violence. Blanche is institutionalized—medical, bureaucratic, masked as care. Modern control of female sexuality doesn’t look like violence (no execution) but operates through institutions claiming therapeutic authority. Williams shows this is more insidious—harder to resist or condemn because it’s framed as helping the woman rather than punishing her.
• 4Agency sustained vs. agency lost: Even facing execution, the Duchess maintains “I am Duchess of Malfi still”—her selfhood persists. Blanche’s final line—“I have always depended on the kindness of strangers”—is ambiguous: is it dignity or complete delusion? She may have lost grip on reality entirely. Webster allows his heroine to sustain identity through death; Williams shows identity potentially shattered by patriarchal violence and psychiatric control.

Feminist Readings

Feminist critics read both plays as exposing patriarchy’s fundamental investment in controlling female sexuality as means of controlling reproduction, inheritance, and social order. Lisa Jardine argues Webster creates genuinely radical female character whose sexual autonomy must be violently eliminated to restore patriarchal order—the Duchess threatens male control at its foundation. Feminist readings of Streetcar emphasize how Blanche is destroyed through confluence of patriarchal mechanisms: sexual double standards (she’s judged; Stanley isn’t), economic dependence (she has nowhere to go), psychiatric medicalization (institutionalized), and women’s complicity (Stella’s denial). Both plays show patriarchy requires female sexual submission—the Duchess and Blanche refuse, and patriarchy mobilizes all available violence to destroy them. The Duchess is killed; Blanche is erased. Both methods achieve same goal: eliminating threat of autonomous female sexuality.

Psychoanalytic Readings

Psychoanalytic critics read Ferdinand’s violence as stemming from repressed incestuous desire—his obsession with the Duchess’s body, rage at her remarriage, and lycanthropy after destroying her all suggest psychosexual pathology. Frank Whigham and others argue Ferdinand wants to possess the Duchess sexually, destroys her when he cannot, creating trauma he cannot survive psychologically. Psychoanalytic readings of Blanche emphasize her sexuality as repetition compulsion—unconsciously attempting to master/undo trauma (Allan’s death) by reenacting it (intimacies with strangers). Her sexuality isn’t healthy desire but psychological symptom. Stanley’s rape is read as assertion of phallic masculine dominance against castrating female (Blanche’s refinement threatens his masculine identity, so he reasserts it through sexual violence). Psychoanalytic approaches risk individualizing structural problems—focusing on Ferdinand’s pathology or Blanche’s trauma rather than analyzing how patriarchy creates these dynamics systematically.

Queer Theory Readings

Queer theorists note both plays center heterosexuality’s violence and failures. Allan Grey’s homosexuality and suicide haunt Streetcar—his inability to survive in homophobic society creates Blanche’s trauma. Williams (himself closeted gay man) shows heterosexual marriage and desire as compulsory and damaging—Blanche must perform heterosexual desirability to survive economically; Stanley’s aggressive heterosexual masculinity is violence. Some queer readings note Ferdinand’s possible homoerotic desire for Antonio (rival for the Duchess’s affection) or argue his incestuous desire for the Duchess is queerly non-reproductive—he wants to possess her but abhors her pregnancy/children. Both plays can be read as exposing how compulsory heterosexuality and rigid gender roles damage everyone, though women suffer most visibly. Blanche’s excessive femininity (performative, theatrical) might be read as drag performance—femininity as costume worn for survival, revealing gender as performance rather than nature.