Judith Butler And Michael Foucault

have looked at the history of sexuality since the 18th century in what Foucault calls

While Foucault analyzes the Victorian view of sexuality through the repressive hypothesis, the same can be done for a contemporary view of sexuality. There are specific concepts and ideas which are considered acceptable to the public sphere. Foucault says that this is a “policing of sex: that is, not the rigor of a taboo, but the necessity of regulating sex through useful and

Repression hypothesis claims sex has been repressed by power for the last three hundred years, and we can achieve sexual liberation if we free ourselves from this repression by talking openly about sex. Foucault disagreed with repression hypothesis. He was not saying that the repression didn’t exist, but he claimed that the discourse about sex had in fact intensified and grown because of the repression.

The elusive, complicated nature of sexuality makes the word itself incredibly difficult to define in absolutes. Michel Foucault would argue that sexuality does not exist in absolutes; rather it presents as a culmination of historical constructions and the sociopolitical and economic conventions that are ever-present companions of history. It follows then, instead of focusing our efforts on discussing the nature of sexuality or the definition of the word, we seek to address sexuality as an object of discourse. Foucault asserts that because sexuality is a construction, the way it is spoken about and the very nature of the language used in reference to sexuality can be altered if it is allowed for. In

Subjection is a process that operates in society, and according to sociologist Michel Foucault, can be applied to a multiplicity of discourses. Foucault explains that the beginning of the nineteenth century marked the age of sexual repression and censorship, which became a time of subjection through exerting disciplinary control over a docile population. In his The Introduction to the History of Sexuality, Foucault explains how the scientification of sex came about. Specifically, it was an attempt to obtain a uniform truth about sex. However, there is no truth to it, but rather it is merely a vehicle for social control. Foucault distinguishes the discourses of sexuality from the science of

Of course, the analysis of Michel Foucault didn’t stay unnoticeable. In fact his work stirred up all sorts of discussions. The author was accused of misreading the artwork, reducing the role of Velasquez as a creator of Las Meninas and as a historical figure, imposing artificial meaning that is not there, oversimplifying the painting and so on. In short, Foucault’s interpretation located outside of traditional art historical approach and therefore didn’t seem legit for many scholars.

Foucault says that people cannot make formulated, definitive understandings about social knowledge and then write them down in journals as law. The motives of this knowledge, therefore. must be universal. For Foucault, this motive is power, but Foucault never says this directly. He says power is “a grid of intelligibility of the social order” (HIS 93) while knowledge is the same thing. Foucault says that it is in discourse that power and knowledge are joined together (HIS 100) Foucault also states, “Discourses are tactical elements or blocks operating in the field of force relations.” (HIS 101-102)

One of the themes that was presented in our readings the last two weeks was Sexuality. Foucault discusses the history of sexuality and how prior to the 18 century sexuality was freely discussed and open to everyone. Therefore, in the first two parts of the book Foucault discusses if we are sexually repressed. Sexuality is supposed to be keep silence and is a taboo as well as is not existence according to Foucault. He goes on to discuss that sexuality is now seen as it’s supposed to be kept between a husband and wife. Sexuality of others types is seen as wrong and truly aren’t acceptable by society. Throughout chapter one Foucault discusses the doubts of if we truly are sexually repressed. The three doubts that he states are, 1. “Is sexual

In the writings of Michel Foucault is the quote: “..one can speak of the formation of a disciplinary society in this movement that stretches from the enclosed disciplines, a sort of social ‘quarantine’, to an indefinitely generalizable mechanism of ‘panopticism’. Not because the disciplinary modality of power has replaced all the others; but because it has infiltrated the others, sometimes undermining them, linking them together..” (Page 324) Foucault thought of our society as a “disciplinary society”, meaning that power has been widely developed and spread throughout organized institutions that achieve obedience and discipline in which citizens comply with. There are rules and regulations that we all must conform to in order the continue

Foucault's philosophy saw power as controlling everything to asure their class survival So you may ask where Foucault's work fits into this modern history and what is going on in today's society when it comes to sexuality. There is no doubt in my mind after reading much of his work, quotes and studies done on him by other scholars after his passing that; his studies played a grate importance and transcended into the modern era in a more open and accepting sexuality as a normal part of being human. In addition, chapter two (1990, 105).has demonstrated that Foucault perceives that the effects of power can influence the way in which the individual experiences their sexuality. For this reason I believe is that there are many more poor people than they are rich. The statistics speak for themselves in that the top 1% controls the rest of society, this is because the lower class is less selective when it comes to whom they marry and are less concerned with perserving their bloodlines than the upper class. Moreover, many changes has come about in our society in regards to sex being more open and more accepting because the lower class has been fighting for

This article, as the title suggests, discusses the history of sexuality. In the early 1700s, in the Victorian Era, sexuality was not to be discussed, and if so, very discretely and not in front of children. As sexuality progressed, it became a political cause as the demand for sexual freedom, and the knowledge to be gained. Sexuality became a sort of power. For this reason, Foucault suggests that we find it difficult to speak on the subject as we feel we are defying established power. In addition, the second reading was Michel Foucault, French Historian by Peter Kerr. This article describes a brief history of Michel Foucault. The article discussed some of philosophies, including structuralism, writings such as; “The Order of Things”, “The Birth of the Clinic”, and “The Archeology of Knowledge”, and the various social causes he was active in. One idea that stood out was his idea of insanity, stating, that it was less a medical problem than a way in which society categorized

Do not get me wrong, a lot of the speeches in Symposium I had agreed with and made connections to, but looking at modern day society we do not really see sexuality as a form of transcendence, unless you follow the Kama Sutra properly, or as a means to become immortal. So, I sided more with Foucault for his claim or his Repressive Hypothesis since the sixteenth century discourse on sex/sexuality undergone processes of restriction. Quite the opposite happened after where sex/sexuality were subjected a process to increase the talk over the subject; “the techniques of power exercised over [sex/sexuality] have not obeyed a principle of rigorous selection, but rather one of dissemination and implantation of polymorphous sexualities; and that the will to knowledge has not come to a halt in the face of a taboo that must not be lifted, but has persisted in constituting – despite many mistakes, of course – a science of sexuality”

Foucault is a very famous name when it comes to political theory. In our contemporary theory politics course, one of the required reading materials was Foucault’s Discipline and Punish. Foucault had these very strong ideas about punishment, especially about, the “modern penal system” or otherwise known as prison. Foucault was very analytic about discipline and punishment prior to the eighteenth century. In the beginning of Discipline and Punish, Foucault explains how prior to the eighteenth century, punishment was something that was used as severe torture to the human body, as well as explaining how when people were punished, punishments usually were public and or ceremonial. Foucault had strong ideas and he mentioned some very important terms to make his argument. To help the reader of this essay, some very important key terms will be defined. These key terms include, knowledge, power, discipline, panopticism, and politics. Hopefully these key terms can help the reader understand Foucault’s beliefs and ideas, as well as the second part of the essay where Foucault’s ideas will be related to modern day pop culture. Two very important terms that are the foundation of Foucault’s work are, knowledge and power. The root of Foucault’s analytic would be those two previous words. Foucault does not view power as a negative thing, because he believes it is something that is always going to exist. Foucault

Foucault discusses the concept of biopolitics, which links biological processes, such as the reproductive process which can be be controlled via birth control, to economic or political power, for example when the government controls what kind of birth control is legal and acceptable and economically they make millions of dollars on the birth control pill and condoms. Similar to biopolitics is the concept of bio-power, “...it put into operation an entire machinery for producing true discourses concerning it. Not only did

He asserts that the desire to address the repressed nature of sex participated in the very organization that it was seeking to decipher (Bristow, 1997). Foucault contends further by suggesting that it is uncharacteristic to modern societies not to relegate sex to a sinister existence but to address it ceaselessly while at the same time exploiting it as the secret. Foucault expresses that rather than a puritanism of language or a unvarying concern to conceal sex, what marks those three centuries (17th – 19th) is the increase of devices that had been invented for speaking about it, having it spoken about, inducing it to speak of itself, for listening, recording, transcribing and re-distributing what is said about it: a whole network of varying, specific and coercive transpositions into discourse. Rather than suppression, what progressed was a delimited and polymorphous stimulation to discourse (Foucault 1978). Foucault holds no regard to what is termed as the 'repressive hypothesis' as he feels that a society cannot be sexually repressed when there is such a provocation to discourse upon this very belief (Bristow