|
19th Century
With enlightenment, the view of
sexuality as something sinful to be confessed mutated. It was
adapted to modern demands of rationality by turning itself
into a science. Foucault makes a strong distinction between
what we would still today call science and a prejudicial
doctrine on human procreation. Comparing these discourses on
human sexuality to those from the same epoch on animal and
vegetal reproduction, the difference is surprising. Their weak
tenability - I won't even say in scientificity, but in
elementary logic, places them apart in the history of
knowledge.
The doctrines on sexuality postulated several
"unnatural" sexual behaviors. In the 16th century,
the focus was on regulating the sexuality of the married
couple, ignoring other forms of sexual relations, but now
other groups were identified: the sexuality of children,
criminals, mentally ill and gays. "The perverse"
became a group, instead of an attribute. Sexuality became seen
as the core of some peoples' identity. Homosexual relations
had been seen as a sin that could be committed from time to
time, but now a group of "homosexuals" emerged.
Foucault writes: "The sodomite was a recidivist, but the
homosexual is now a species."
The homosexual of the 19th
century became a person: a past, a history and an adolescence,
a personality, a life style; also a morphology, with an
indiscreet anatomy and possibly a mystical physiology. Nothing
of his full personality escapes his sexuality. Seeing gays as
a group is now taken for granted, but before the 18th century
the idea would never had occurred to ask the question whether
homosexuality is a function of heredity or of upbringing. It
was simply not seen as being a fundamental part of the person,
but instead as an action, something s/he did. Foucault
emphasizes that the aim of these new moral codes was not to
abolish all forms of sexuality, but instead to preserve health
and procreation. Many forms of sexuality were seen as harmful
and they wanted to protect health and the purity of the race.
A mixture of ideas on population growth, venereal diseases and
heredity ("degeneration" was to be avoided) created
the idea that many forms of sexual conduct where dangerous.
|
 |
  |
|
Confessions
is the basis of Sexuality
Historically, there have been two ways of viewing
sexuality, according to Foucault. In China, Japan, India
and the Roman Empire, it has been seen as an "ars
erotica", "erotic art", where sex is seen
as an art and a special experience and not something dirty
and shameful. It is something to be kept secret, but only
because of the view that it would lose its power and its
pleasure if spoken about.
In Western society, on the other hand, something
completely different has been created, what Foucault calls
"scientia sexualis", the science of sexuality.
It is originally (17th century) based on a phenomenon
diametrically opposed to ars erotica: the confession. It
is not just a question of the Christian confession, but
more generally the urge to talk about it. A fixation with
finding out the "truth" about sexuality arises,
a truth that is to be confessed. It is as if sexuality did
not exist unless it is confessed. Foucault writes:
We have since become an extraordinarily confessing society.
Confession has spread its effects far and wide: in the
judicial system, in medicine, in pedagogy, in familial
relations, in amorous relationships, in everyday life and
in the most solemn rituals; crimes are confessed, sins are
confessed, thoughts and desires are confessed, one's past
and one's dreams are confessed, one's childhood is
confessed; one's diseases and problems are confessed;
This forms a strong criticism of psychoanalysis,
representing the modern, scientific form of confession.
Foucault sees psychoanalysis as a legitimization of sexual
confession. In it, everything is explained in terms of
repressed sexuality and the psychologist becomes the sole
interpreter of it. Sexuality is no longer just something
people hide, but it is also hidden from themselves, which
gives the theological, minute confession a new life.
The reason sexuality should be confessed is to be
found in the Christian view of it. It was not, as it is
today, seen as a strong, obvious force, but as something
treacherous, something only to be found by careful
introspection. Therefore every detail had to be laid forth
in confession; every trace of pleasure experienced had to
be examined to find the traces of sin.
In this attention to details the reason sexuality is
given such importance in our society is to be found.
Making sexuality something sinful did not make it
disappear. Quite the contrary: it was reinforced and
became something to be noticed everywhere.
|
