Fantasy domination does not translate to actual submission

Evidence

Feminine docility is, moreover, a very equivocal notion. We have seen that most of the time the young girl accepts in her imagination the domination of a demigod, a hero, a male, but it is still only a narcissistic game. She is in no way disposed to submit to the carnal expression of this authority in reality. By contrast, she often refuses to give herself to a man she admires and respects, giving herself to an ordinary man instead. It is an error to seek the key to concrete behavior in fantasy, because fantasies are created and cherished as fantasies. The little girl who dreams of rape with a mixture of horror and complicity does not desire to be raped, and the event, if it occurred, would be a loathsome catastrophe. — Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex, 1006

Categorization

• XREF: Directly counters the psychoanalytic model (Freud/Lacan) that treats fantasy as the key to behavior; aligns with later feminist critiques of rape-myth conflation of fantasy with consent. — connects to: Domination is analyzed via its functioning instruments, not its legitimation — Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended, 1486; Crusader contact reinforced fantasy rather than correcting misconceptions — Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 175
• SEED: Moored to current debates about ‘consent’ and pornographic fantasy, an essay could trace how the misreading Beauvoir identifies still shapes legal and cultural treatment of women’s stated desires.

Broader Connections

• Crusader contact reinforced fantasy rather than correcting misconceptions #exemplifies (0.80) — Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 175
• Domination is analyzed via its functioning instruments, not its legitimation #complicates (0.70) — Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended, 1486