Contemporary Sexual Politics: a Background

This is the first part in a series of three posts in which I aim to discuss contemporary sexual politics from a more theoretical and research-based perspective than in my other posts. It forms part of a broader discussion on how sexuality can—and perhaps should—be understood as constituted by a multitude of actors. Therefore, we might not be able to speak of a single contemporary politics of sexuality, but rather of a range of political positions.

During the 20th century, numerous philosophers and researchers attempted to write “the history of sexuality,” but the one who has influenced me the most is the French philosopher Michel Foucault. I have actually read all three of his original works on sexuality, but I believe the first book covers the essential foundations for discussing and understanding sexuality. Broadly, this can be said to consist of two levels of particular interest to this series of posts:

a) the repressive hypothesis
b) the discussion on power/knowledge and the multitude of actors that constitute sexuality

Departing from point a—the repressive hypothesis—Foucault begins his work by stating that people often believe their sexuality is repressed. According to proponents of this theory, conventional history shows that sexuality became increasingly controlled during the 17th century with the rise of bourgeois or industrial society. In this society, sex was pushed from the public into the private sphere, where discussions about it became silenced and taboo. However, Foucault argues that this regulation in fact led to a virtual explosion in discourse about sexuality, where it became more heavily scrutinized and regulated. Sexuality, then, was not silenced but became the focus of new discussions, making it more visible than ever in society.

What also changed during this historical period, according to Foucault, was that control over sexuality shifted in line with the rise of industrial society. Previously, those who had intervened in discussions about sexuality were mainly the Church and, occasionally, lawmakers. With the rise of modern science, however, medicine became the dominant force. Sex became something about which objective, neutral scientific truths could supposedly be produced. These truths were then used by lawmakers to regulate sexuality. Here we see a shift from religious to medical forms of power.



This brings us to point b. Sexuality is no longer discussed solely from a religious or ethical perspective but also from one that claims to reveal its truth through medical science. These claims to truth are then used to regulate sexuality. What is important here is that these “truths” are neither objectively true nor purely scientific, since science is always shaped by those who conduct it. As a result, what is deemed true through science is never a clear reflection of reality. Moreover, medicine is just one of many perspectives shaping the moral discourse around sexuality—discourse that also opens up spaces for resistance. These are the themes this series of entries seeks to explore.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The use of history and why historians should mind the gap

Image
 Around two decades ago we can to some extent see how a paradigm hit Swedish history science in full force. This paradigm consisted of studies on how history was used in society and often came with a theoretical luggage from the German and English tradition. After having supervised student theseses on this area I still remain somewhat doubtful as too how students, and historians, often uses these theories. Perhaps this is also due to my PhD-thesis containing a similar approach when it comes to putting the past into neat little boxes. My criticism towards this paradigm is that it have come to be utilised as a way to only package uses of history, rather than what these packages contains. Let us for instance take the form of studying uses of history as narratives or if one so wishes, tropes. The idea here is to study how certain forms are expressed as stories of trauma, grief or “from darkness to light”. What this actually is about in the more theoretical work is to study how history ...
Read more

Contemporary Sexual Politics: Efforts to Silence Sexuality in Politics

Image
Following up on last week’s post, we can ask ourselves where questions of sexuality are being challenged in politics. From a contemporary perspective, I would argue that we are currently witnessing global attempts—particularly from conservative actors—to banish issues of sexuality from public discourse. In Foucauldian theory, we can speak of several forms of the exercise of power. Foucault uses the concept of biopower to analyze social views on sex, capitalism, and power. One of the central aspects of biopower is that it often operates through the individual, who is expected to internalize social norms rather than be externally forced to accept them. Yet, in the case of sexuality, we have over the past decades witnessed rather forceful attempts to silence it, thereby making people unaware of important aspects of their own sexuality. In such cases, the effort seems to lie in banishing "unwanted" expressions from public discourse, thereby limiting the individual’s scope for a...
Read more