Who Am I? Let Me Use My Sexuality to Explain…
Reading parts One, Two, and Three of Michel Foucault’s The History of Sexuality, I have bitten off more than I could ever chew (let alone digest). I am grateful to have a class of peers to discourse the book with because I am at the point where thinking too much about one subject has led to confusion instead of clarity. There are subjects that I am eager to discuss in class: the relationship between power and pleasure, what, “Modern society…is in actual fact, and directly, perverse,” actually means (47). I figured that for this response I should tackle something that does not leave me feeling that my thoughts have taken up residence in a dryer, tumbling round and round for eternity.
There is only one page in this week’s reading where I jotted down “interesting” twice. On page 43 Foucault describes a turning point for how society regards homosexuality. According to Foucault, before the nineteenth century it was viewed that sodomy “was a category of forbidden acts” that was against the law. Those who practiced sodomy were lawbreakers, but nothing more. However, this viewpoint changed with the perverse implantation (which I do not fully understand, and would love to discuss in class). All of a sudden the individual, and not the act, became the focus. Instead of being one who engaged in sodomy, there was the notion of the homosexual—one who had every aspect of his life related to the sexual acts in which he was engaging. Homosexuality encompassed everything including, “A past, a case history, and a childhood…a type of life…with an indiscreet anatomy and possibly a mysterious physiology.” Foucault continues the latter part of the previous sentence by stating that homosexuality was, “a hermaphrodism of the soul.” Furthermore, “the homosexual was now a species” (43).
It is interesting that Foucault identifies when in history homosexuality, as an identity, emerged. However, I think that this is an example of a larger phenomenon of the nineteenth century: individual sexuality. No longer did one engage (or not engage) in sexual acts. Rather, each person was encouraged to examine his/her own sexuality, and to break it down physically, mentally, and emotionally. Sexuality became part of one’s identity.
What I stated above may not necessarily have been true of the nineteenth century, but it is today. Foucault posits that our society is obsessed with discussing sex, and that it is in fact the most talked about subject in our societal discourse. It is hard to disagree with Foucault on this point. As with homosexuality in the nineteenth century, sexuality has become an identity. We use a politician’s sexual history to gauge whether he or she will be a proper lawmaker. We judge a woman’s ability to be a leader based on the clothes she is wearing. The title of this course should be changed to “Sexuality Is American Culture.”
I noted “interesting” twice on page 43 not because of the transition from sodomy to homosexuality. Rather, it was due to the idea that sexuality could be an identifier. What I find interesting is that sex has moved from an act to a personal trait. I am not quite sure what this reflects overall, but I am looking forward to finding out.
Tags: Foucault, Homosexuality, Identity, Sexuality
