Sunday, February 4, 2007

Michel Foucault...History of Sexuality


Michel Foucault's book The History of Sexuality is a very complex book to understand. Foucault talks about the discourse of sexuality and how the dominant culture represents sexuality. An example of this is marriage and its representation within the heterosexual context. Heterosexual marriage in this case is economically useful because the wife will depend on the husband to support the family so that the state does not have to. Sex is usually thought of as occurring after marriage: "The sex of husband and wife was beset by rules and recommendations. The marriage relation was the most intense focus of constraints; it was spoken of more than anything else; more than any other relation, it was required to give a detailed accounting of itself. It was under constant surveillance" (Foucault 37). Foucault discusses the constant surveillance we face in society and how society structures human beings from childhood onwards. Sexuality has been constructed in various forms: "the sexuality of doctor and patient, teacher and student, psychiatrist and mental patient, those which haunt spaces (the sexuality of the home, the school, the prison) all form the correlation of exact procedures of power" (Foucault 47). Although marriage has become a part of state concern, it allows for those who are married to gain certain benefits and protection within the state. Marriage supports the idea of heterosexual monogamy, which the dominant religion practices as "politically conservative" (Foucault 37). The upper class would support the heterosexual married couple for instant medical benefits rather than supporting a single person. Being married allows a couple to register with the state and gain protection. In the case of a divorce, it becomes a constant surveillance and policing of the state. An example of this is if a person cheated when they are married; the state protects the other person and helps in ensuring alimony from the person who cheated because cheating, in this case, is perceived as wrong by the state.

No comments: