Autonomy as destiny: A feminist construct of female psychology, development and self-realizatio

Historical and modern feminism has consistently advocated an "ideology of autonomy" as a developmental alternative to ascribed roles for women. This dissertation traces the evolution of this ideology in feminist theory, elaborates its opposition to the traditional "relational paradigm" in the psychology of women, integrates its assumptions with humanistic personality theory in psychology, and synthesizes these elements into three dimensions of autonomy which promote novel guidelines for women's adult development: (1) self-fulfillment in work (role combination); (2) female achievement as a non-deviant sex role standard for women (androgyny); (3) redefinition of an authentic female self (sex role transcendence).;The thesis proposes that a dual "construct of autonomy" exists in feminism--a liberal theory of fulfillment endorsing femal individuality, self-realization and social power through exercise of public roles, and radical theory of oppression rejecting male sexualization of female identity and prescribing transformation of debilitating norms of "femininity." The dissertation identifies five distinct psychologies that this construct has generated in modern feminism: three secular accounts (a liberal "psychology of role combination," a radical pro-woman "psychology of survival" and a radical power analysis "psychology of oppression") and two approaches in liberal academic feminism where psychological description reflects the radical assumption of prejudice against women (the "psychology of sexism" and the "psychology of unconscious ideology"). Within the three dimensions, these psychologies are explored as models of external and internal causality and connected to their counterparts in psychological theory--self-actualization, social learning and neo-Freudian psychosocial-cognitive explanation.;The dimensions comprise the "environmental school" of modern feminist revision and represent a scientific revolution challenging the relational determinism and double standard of development in the normal science of women. Female experience is reconstructed in terms of cultural determination, and gender differences are explained in terms of sex role conditioning and internalization of sexual stereotypes. These assumptions and the goals of female individuality, achievement and self-creation also highlight a widening gulf in feminist psychology between environmental revision and the more recent neo-conservative "relational school" which returns developmental premises to women's "special" affiliative character structure.