Course:CSIS200/2025/Strap-On Sex Toys as a Symbol of Lesbian Empowerment

Introduction

Sexual practices have often been viewed through the lens of compulsory heterosexuality - a term coined by Adrienne Rich to describe the societal framework that heterosexuality is not an innate state of being, but rather a social, political, and legal institution that is enforced through patriarchal control. Through this lens, sex itself is narrowly defined as penis-in-vagina penetration, an act that excludes and invalidates many experiences, especially those had by lesbian couples. This heteronormative definition of sex is further enforced by the societal definition of virginity being the rupturing of a female's hymen. This article will explore the connection between heteronormativity and strap-on sex toys in the context of lesbian relationships. Specifically, I would like to uncover the ways in which the use of strap-on sex toys can be understood as a rebellion against heteronormative ideals of sex. While strap-ons - prosthetic devices that replicate the form of a penis - may appear to conform to heteronormative ideals, their use by lesbians raises questions about how sex is being defined outside of male bodies and patriarchal norms. Additionally, I will use the Karen Pearlston (2017) article unpacking the Canadian Divorce Act of 1968 as a historical legal context, highlighting the extent to which sexual legitimacy was, and is, tied to heterosexual marriage and intercourse. I expect to find that the use of strap-on sex toys in lesbian relationships resists compulsory heterosexuality. While the act of penetration reproduces the heteronormative definition of “real sex,” the act of “queering” penetration through female-female intimacy reclaims and redefines sexual legitimacy beyond patriarchal and legal frameworks such as those reinforced by the Divorce Act of 1968.

For the purpose of this article, I am defining lesbian relationships as between two people with vulvas. I acknowledge and celebrate the fact that lesbian relationships can include a myriad of identities, sexes, and ways of life.

Historical Contexts

While discourse around strap-ons has increased throughout recent years - particularly in discussions surrounding the 2SLGBTQIA+ community - the history of the device dates back to much earlier than one might assume; the earliest versions actually being said to be used by men who could not please their partners. This ensured that the use of strap-ons did not disturb the intense gender roles present in the early 20th century, and instead allowed men to be the sole provider of a woman's sexual pleasure even if difficulties such as erectile dysfunction were present. The device's origin being to provide men the ability to remain sexually dominant over women highlights how its use by women disrupts the heteronormative idea that women cannot be providers of sexual pleasure. The use of strap-ons in lesbian relationships took the power from men as sexual beings and lessened the sexual power dynamic by allowing either partner to provide penetration, each having an important role in sexual activity. This video by Self Serve Toys provides a general context for the origin and common uses of strap-ons, and perpetuates the idea that the device can be used for all relationships, regardless of age, sex, or identity. This further encapsulates how the use of strap-ons provides an even playing field in terms of sexual power dynamics.

Strap-Ons Within Art

Avril, É. (Illustrator) (1906) An Early Depiction of Lesbians Making Love with a Strap-on Dildo. [Image of Painting]. Public Domain photograph retrieved from Wikimedia Commons.

Although the strap-on was invented as a marital aid to assist men in providing sexual pleasure to their wives, artistic depictions of strap-ons being used in lesbian contexts exists as early as 1830. For example, this lithograph, illustrated by Édouard-Henri Avril in the 1906 edition of Des Figuris Veneris, depicts two women engaging in sex with the use of a strap-on. This piece was published in France, where early 20th century society was heavily dominated by patriarchal idealism, enhancing male domination. In the context of this societal power dynamic, this image highlights how the resistance to a heteronormative society has existed long before formal "movements" and public rebellions. Furthermore, their use of a strap-on takes the sexual power away from men who were considered to have a biologically higher sex drive, and instead regards themselves as responsible for their sexual pleasure. I chose this image due to the fact that it embodies the idea that the use of strap-ons could be to reclaim one's own sexual autonomy, which is further perpetuated by the intense power men had over women in the early 20th century.

Legal Frameworks

Legal definitions regarding sexual acts highlight the innate heteronormativity intertwined within every-day life. Not only do these definitions perpetuate heteronormative ideals, but they also demonstrate that sex is able to be defined by a heteronormative government, without taking into account the experiences had by the people over which they rule. For example, acts widely engaged in by the 2SLGBTQ+ community such as sodomy - defined as sexual intercourse involving oral or anal stimulation - was punishable by death until 1869. Similarly, gross indecency - widely understood as any actions suggesting motivation to engage in sexual intercourse with a member of the same sex - was a punishable offence until it was repealed in 1987. Government officials being able to legally define deeply personal acts such as sex offers a very narrow lens for sexual acts to be viewed through, and allows the perception of the government to influence intimate actions that are ultimately not of their concern.

Legal Definition of Sex

Criminal Code, R.S.C 1892, c. 146. Public Domain document retrieved from Wikimedia Commons.

This photo is a screenshot of the official Criminal Code, published in 1892. From this time until Bill C-127 of 1982, the Criminal Code included rape as a prosecutable offence, narrowly focusing on penetration within the definition of the act. Therefore, the legal definition of sex in general was focused on penetration, which inadvertently assumes the presence of a penis. The language within the law also places women in a position of powerlessness, as the definition of rape - and therefore sex - describes the act as being done to a woman by a man. This reinforces the power dynamic that men are solely responsible for sexual intercourse simply due to the fact that they own the penis involved. Not only this, but the statute implies that women are weak and easily manipulated with the suggestion that they could be coerced into engaging in sex by pretending to be her husband. The language within the legal definition of sexual acts provides a concrete example of just how powerful the sexual double standard truly was from a legal standpoint, and provides context for how women taking their sexual power back through the use of strap-ons remains an empowering rebellion against these norms. Additionally, proof of penetration was required in order to formally accuse someone of rape, further disregarding many forms of both consensual and non-consensual sex. I chose this photo to highlight the extent in which heteronormativity is intertwined with daily life, as well as factually demonstrate the legal and societal idea that sex is not only focused on penetration, but also able to be defined by a heteronormative government. Thus, making lesbian couples' use of penetrative devices - such as strap-ons - a way to take responsibility for their own sexual pleasure, a concept that rebels against these heteronormative frameworks.

The Divorce Act of 1968

The 1968 Divorce Act was a turning point for marriages across Canada, as filing for divorce was now possible even if there was no legal reason to do so. The Act provided both partners in the marriage the ability to file for divorce without probable cause such as adultery or abuse, allowing for couples to disband their marriage due to factors such as outgrowing the partnership or having the desire to instead have a friendship with each other. However, this was also the first time that "engaging in a homosexual act" was included within the list of probable causes. Particularly, homosexuality was included within the list that housed sodomy, bestiality, and rape - implying that rather than homosexuality being a form of infidelity, it existed within the same vain as acts involving violation. This suggests that sexual acts between members of the same sex were considered of the same taste as rape and bestiality, furthering the heteronormative idea that sexual acts between members of the same sex were the same level of repulsive.

The Divorce Act, R.S.C. 1968. Public Domain document retrieved from York University Digital Commons. Emphasis added.

Because homosexuality was now explicitly included in the list of probable cause for divorce, law officials had to concretely define homosexual acts between women. Due to the fact that in order to get a divorce the probable cause had to be proven, the government now needed to identify what constitutes "lesbian sex", in order for husbands to be able to divorce their lesbian wives. A series of divorce cases made this need abundantly clear, as courts did not know to what extent contact between two women became sexual and could be classified as a homosexual act. In 1972, the first case to highlight the need for a concrete definition took place, where the judge granted the divorce due to both women involved reaching orgasm. However, this definition seemed to fall short of what lesbian couples were truly engaging in, highlighted by another divorce case that took place in 1974. In this case, there was no genital contact between the women, the only physical involvement between the two being handling one another's breasts. Therefore, the judge instead claimed that genital involvement was not necessary to constitute a homosexual act, and that because of a series of love letters written between the two women in addition to the physical acts, the divorce was granted.

It was easier for government officials to define sexual acts in which at least one penis was involved, due to the heteronormative belief that penetration was necessary to define sexual intercourse. This inability to concretely define the ways in which lesbians were having sex plays a critical role in the perpetuation of women being seen as submissive beings who can't be responsible for their own pleasure and sexual wellbeing. Due to the fact that penetration and lesbian relationships were viewed as mutually exclusive, adding strap-ons to sexual roles in these relationships provided an avenue for the involvement of a penis to be on their own terms - and without the inherent sexual stereotypes attached.

Modern Cultural Representations

(2012) Fetish Fantasy Plus-Size Strap-On. [Image of Product]. Retrieved from Amazon.com

The early Freudian theory that sexual roles were simply a human’s natural state perpetuates the idea of dominance as a “masculine trait” and submission as a “feminine trait”, and is consistently upheld in a heteronormative society. Furthermore, sexual dominance is even considered an important part of the masculine ideal, leaving little room for women to embody sexual agency while still maintaining their femininity. However, modern media - especially regarding the use of strap-ons - has reframed this heteronormative idea, by allowing women to maintain their feminine energy while exhibiting sexual empowerment. Additionally, modern examples highlight that there is no inherent power over one partner, as both partners play a vital and powerful role in sexual acts.

This product image of a strap-on packaged with a confident and assertive, yet still feminine, woman on the box visually challenges heteronormative ideas surrounding femininity and sexuality. The model is deliberately rebelling against the heteronormative idea that dominance is inherently masculine, by embodying sexual agency while still maintaining her femininity. The product’s marketing reframes the strap-on from simply an imitation of the penis to a tool of empowerment, allowing women to physically occupy positions of control and pleasure without reproducing the heteronormative idea of male dominance. The model on the packaging uses visual cues such as posture and gaze to communicate authority, reclaiming sexual confidence as feminine rather than masculine. This imagery resists heteronormative assumptions that associate penetration with male power and submission with female identity. Instead, it “queers” the signification of the penis to a symbol detached from biological “male-ness” and instead re-imagined through desire between women. I chose this image because it further asserts that the use of strap-ons between women can be considered a form of resistance against heteronormative ideas that women are not sexually powerful and autonomous.

(2017) Strap-On Beauties. [Image of Cover of Film]. Retrieved from Google Images.

This film poster further visually disrupts these heteronormative assumptions that equate penetration with masculinity by displaying that role with a female body. The woman wearing the strap-on embodies a form of agency similar to the model in the last photo, while her partner’s reciprocal body language reframes “dominance” and “submission” as mutually powerful roles rather than hierarchical roles.  The style of the poster - particularly through the models’ posing -  perpetuates lesbian sexuality as both autonomous and empowered, rejecting the idea that queer intimacy must uphold heteronormative roles in order to be valid. Instead of reproducing patriarchal roles through the “penetrator” being more powerful, the strap-on becomes a tool equally accessible and pleasurable to both parties. The visual engagement between the two models underscores that power and pleasure are interchangeable and exist in a multi-directional dynamic, rather than being focused on the penetrator holding the sexual power. I chose this image due to the fact that I feel it contributes to the project’s argument that strap-on use in lesbian relationships resists heteronormative power by “queering” the very symbols - particularly penetration and dominance - through which patriarchal sexuality defines itself.

(2022), Christina Aguilera Wears Strap-On for L.A. Pride Performance. [Image]. Retrieved from Getty Images

Perhaps the most stark and public example of female empowerment through strap-ons is Christina Aguilera's 2022 LA Pride performance. This is a powerful modern visual metaphor for resistance to heteronormativity. Through the performance, Christina Aguilera transforms the phallic symbol from a heteronormative masculine context to one of female empowerment. Judith Butler (1990) theorizes that gender itself is performative, a “stylized repetition of acts” that create the illusion and societal idea of a stable identity - what one “should” be with respect to their gender. Instead of gender being something that we are, it is something we are taught to do. We learn behaviours, clothing styles, and expectations from a heteronormative society, and then repeat this presentation until our gender roles appear stable and "correct". By reclaiming the phallic symbol, Christina Aguilera exposes the heteronormative nature of gendered power and sexual roles, by behaving in a way that is not considered to be "correct" for her gender identity. Similarly to the other images, this photo (and act itself) challenges the heteronormative assumption that penetration and dominance are inherently masculine. This “queering” of the phallic symbol allows for alternative understandings of desire and sexuality that extend beyond heteronormative categories and roles. In this context, the performance aligns with the use of strap-ons in lesbian relationships as both an artistic and somewhat political gesture that destabilises heteronormative normative associations between anatomy, sexuality, and power.

Conclusion

The history, legal frameworks, and modern cultural representation of strap-on sex toys help highlight the fact that their use within lesbian relationships is a deeply political "rebellious" act that resists the ideals of a heteronormative society. From early legal frameworks that defined sex exclusively through penetration to divorce cases that struggled to conceptualise lesbian intimacy without a male body, heteronormative systems have consistently positioned women as sexually passive and dependent upon men for sexual pleasure and legitimacy. However, historical art and modern media demonstrate how strap-ons disrupt these narratives by separating penetration from masculinity and reimagining the phallus as a tool of queer agency rather than male dominance. Whether in early twentieth-century art, modern media, or public performances, strap-ons enable women to reclaim sexual autonomy and redefine power, pleasure, and legitimacy on their own terms. Ultimately, the use of strap-ons in lesbian relationships challenges the legal and cultural logics that have attempted to control women’s bodies and desires, and instead includes a queer method of intimacy that rebels against heteronormative ideas of what sex should be. Through this queering of the strap-ons - and the phallus in general - lesbians not only resist heteronormative cultural norms, but also expand the definition of sex itself, allowing room for sexual practices that are self-determined, reciprocal, and liberated from heteronormativity.

About the Author

Shaelyn Hunter is a 19-year old undergraduate student at The University of British Columbia, pursuing a Major in Psychology and a Minor in Family Studies - with a goal of earning a PhD in Clinical Childhood Psychology. She is the reigning Miss Teen Personality British Columbia 2025, and is extremely passionate about advocating for 2SLGBTQ+ access to mental and sexual health care. She is particularly interested in learning how to effectively reduce sexual stigma and host open conversations to promote empowerment within the 2SLGBTQ+ community and society as a whole.