Pateman argues that the marriage contract illuminates the ways that the employment contract is the sale of one’s person or labor (as opposed to the sale of one’s labor power) and cannot truly be separated from the person. In other words, the recovery of the sexual contract clarifies that contract is the creation of a relationship of subordination. Pateman begins posing questions about the marriage contract, particularly regarding the similarities and differences between the conjugal labor contract and other domestic labor and employment contracts. Because contractual relations gain meaning from their contrast to the private sphere, the marriage contract’s difference from contracts between men in the public sphere reflects the sexual division of labor enshrined in the original contract. 

One comparison that is significant to the contract discussion from the 17th century onward is that of a wife to a slave. The history of coverture laws, wife-selling, state-sanctioned violence against married women, and the denial of married women’s bodily integrity suggest that the husband owns property in his wife; therefore, she is akin to a slave. However, there are limitations to the slave comparison, so Pateman also considers the comparison to servants.