å Sunday, October 29th, 2017

In Part 4, Chapter 4 of Focault’s “History of Sexuality”, the term “technology of sex” is frequently used. Focault talks about how earlier on (within the 17^th century) sex was looked at as a private matter, one that had no association with medicine or the state; society found no reasoning for it to be a societal topic of discussion. The body was meant to be concealed outside the boundaries of the private marriage. Sex did however find itself appropriate to be discussed under the church within the confessions. Yet as time went on discourse concerning sex emerged from confession rooms and bedrooms and eventually made its way to matters of the state. Due to advancements in education, medicine, and economics, sex became a topic of analysis. Relating more specifically to medicine, Focault explains that people began to distinguish a difference between medicine of sex and medicine of the body. They looked closely at sex related diseases and studied those disease’s possible impacts on future generations. Through the new technological analysis of sex, eventually sexual discourse would evolve once more. Though it started as an exclusively private and secular matter, then grew to be discussed and analyzed openly, it eventually began to retreat as the state started regulatory actions against it. “The sexuality of children and adolescents was first problematized, and feminine sexuality medicalized.” (Focault, “History of Sex” pg 120) Society constructed criticisms and regulations surrounding sexual discourse as a response to these new advancements in the “technology of sex”.  Just like in modern day, aside from legal regulations around sex, sex before marriage is still something society has constructed to be shameful, especially for women. Woman are portrayed as disobedient and wrongful if they express their own sexuality. These social constructs and regulations up until modern day I think Focualt recognizes to be stemming from the original Christian Church’s belief that sex and desire is sinful and must be shut down.

When Foucault talks about, “A Technology of Sex” it’s clear that he’s referring to tangible objects as he makes an effort to mention the tracking of said “devices” that partake in the mechanized approach to sex. These objects were socially constructed as a means to scrutinize and inspect how people were having sex and to make the act of sex not just a secular issue, but a state one as well. In doing so, this intense regulation of sex wasn’t enforced through practical means like a police force, but rather through meticulous self-inspection and the observance of vows from the church and laws from the state. This, in turn, helps us to understand the application that went into applying these mechanical devices into the livelihood of people ranging from the 1700’s to the 1900’s. Through this specific mechanization of sex, the act itself went from something private that didn’t need discussion to something that became thoroughly dissected through active discussion, in perhaps monotonous detail to avoid the prudish act of deriving pleasure from discussing it. Which seem to be the intended desire of mechanizing sex and all of its facets; was the careful removal and regulation of pleasure and how people sought pleasure privately. This, I think, had a lot to do with how the church in particular viewed bodily aspects of pleasure and enjoyment as sin and something that should be rectified. By being able to mechanize and control sex through specific tools, it made having a firm grasp on its (the churches) followers all that much easier to do. Which in turn, popularized these devices and their intended use for a very long time as their effectiveness was well documented by none other than the church itself through confessions. Ultimately, when talking about the application of these devices, I think Foucault stresses the idea that these devices were intended to be efficient tools to control prudish acts so both the state and church could benefit appropriately.

Foucault suggests that the history of sexuality is more complex than just the repression of sex. Foucault emphasizes what he calls “a technology of sex” in Part 4 of Chapter 4: Periodization. The new technology of sex that Foucault examines basically required that all individual plus society as a whole essentially put themselves under surveillance, this system emerged from the institution of  economic, medicine and also pedagogy, which is the method and practice of teaching. There was a secularization of sex and the church basically lost it social and cultural significance. The notion of sex started to move away from the church and social classes developed their own views on sexuality. Pedagogy, medicine and demography developed a interest in women’s sexuality, human reproduction and child sexuality. Foucault addresses the idea of repression and how it’s misunderstood. Sexual repression was not exercised for economic motives but because the bourgeois class wanted to control sex as a means of preserving their own health and lineage. Foucault addresses eugenics for sterilization and racial control. The bourgeoisie had concept of healthy sexuality while the aristocracy had a concept of pure bloodlines.The bourgeoisie class believed in the concept of healthy sexuality and believed that general health and longevity would extend their power and influence.  The bourgeois class did not try to repress sexuality instead they embrace it and made it something normal.  Foucault states that there’s a different between bourgeois and the working class when it came to sexuality. For the bourgeois sexuality meant self-affirmation and for the working class it meant control.  Foucault mentions how sexual repression began with the bourgeois class wanting to distinguish themselves and their sexuality from the working class. The concept of the new technology of sex suggests that sexuality was still being repress but in this case by the different social class instead of the church.

I believe Foucault’s intentions in this chapter was to talk about the general discourse of sexuality and how the repression sexuality was being lifted in the twentieth century. The “technology of sex” was a different way of analyzing sexuality in relation to many things such as economics and medicine. According to him the transformation of discourse in the technology of sex opened more opportunities for other changes and techniques to be developed. In the 17th century sex was considered only to be done/discussed in the home, it was something that was shameful to talk about so Foucault believed it hindered the  development of these “technologies of sex”.

I think one of the main reasons we were able to move forward with the discourse of sex was the development and understanding of the medicine of sex. Medicine allowed the prevention of perversions and disease. Prior to this in the 19th century people would worry about them spreading throughout the classes which in turn cause hysteria. The upper class on the other hand used medicine as a form of Eugenics to create what they saw was best in themselves and allowed them to continue being wealthy and to boast the physical superiority. The bourgeois wanted utter control of everything, not only society but the sexuality of their men, women and children. With this newfound technology the bourgeois were able to regulate childbirth and marriage which would ultimately determine the population.

With the technology of medicine developing it also resulted in eugenics in the 19th century, I believe that Foucault determines that sexuality was a social construct created by the bourgeois, it was put into place to empower their social class while essentially the lower class was stunted by it due to their somewhat forced decrease in population from regulated births and marriages that came out of their fears of impurity in the family.

In chapter 4, of “History of Sexuality”, Foucault discusses a ‘technology of sex.” He puts a strong emphasis on the fact that it affected the whole state and not just the church. Society often forced people to abstain from sex and it seemed as if all eyes were on people partaking in “illegal” sexual activities. The technology of sex was used as a way of controlling sex and measuring its impact on society.

Medicine was being used to cure sexual “diseases.” Knowledge of medicine was being used to progress the eugenics movement, which would control breeding and control the genetic quality of the population. The technology of sex began taking the church and religious aspect out of sex and began instilling a more fact and scientific based approach on people. The idea that people could control certain hereditary characteristics of society made people more interested in sex. Studies in hereditary made people more knowledgable and allowed them to carry a certain biological responsibility with regards to future generations. The possibility of transferring diseases and un-normal hereditary traits made people more aware of the consequences of sexual activity. Medicine was being used to make sex more about life and people. It took the shame and punishment aspect out of sex, which made sex a more plausible topic.

Foucault mentions that certain hereditary traits such as homosexuality was passed down and that it could not be controlled. It is a disability that hinders the views that society holds. Foucault tries to imply how society characterizes sexuality highly changes the way people view sex. When discussing the characteristics of sex we see how society held the lower class to a little to none standard when it came to sex. The lower class were seen as people that did not have sex and had no knowledge of it. The lower class had no worth and that the bourgeois controlled the sexual aspects of women and children and to eliminate any hereditary traits that would harm the future children of society. The technology represents an improvement over past beliefs on sex, but it is still a very flawed idea.

In part four chapter four of Foucault work, Foucault mentions the idea of “a technology of sex”. In order to go into depth of the concept you have to know what he is talking about when he mentions “a technology of sex”. Foucault states that during the end of the eighteenth century a new technology of sex emerged. He states the word new due to the fact that it escaped ministerial institution without being completely removed from the topic of sin. Foucault also uses the word new due to the fact that sex expanded to three stand points which were of  pedagogy, of medicine and of demography. Within these three applications Foucault brings them to tie with the specific sexuality of children, the sexual physiology strange to women, and the spontaneous regulations of births. All three applications were coming from the methods that had already been formed by Christianity, now the technology of sex was ordered in relation to the medical institution, the exigency of normality, and the problem of life and illness. With this all being said, it is clear to state that Foucault  is trying to explain that the notion of sex is starting to move away from the church. Foucault talks about the the medicine of perversions and the programs of eugenics. Both were considered to be the two great innovations in the technology of sex of the second half of the nineteenth century. This led to the assumption that heredity that was charged with many diseases ended up making a sexual pervert. This technology of sex also went on to explain how a sexual perversion resulted in being in your genetics meaning it will be pasted on to the next generation as well. Foucault also states that this technology of sex was nothing more than a
medical theory and didn’t have much scientific proof to support its theory. To conclude with this application the medicine stand point of a technology of sex just shows how sex is still being controlled, but this time it is not only by the church.

Kiersten Ahle

Assignment #8

In part four, chapter four of “History of Sexuality” written by Foucault, he emphasizes “technology of sex” (1978:123) Back then, sex was a topic people would only discuss in the privacy of their own homes. It was not a topic to be talked about in public, as most people considered it to be a sin. During the end of the eighteenth century, a completely new technology of sex had emerged. Through pedagogy, medicine, and economics, it made sex a concert of the state. Sex had become a matter that required the social body as a whole, and to be placed under surveillance. Due to medicine being a concern regarding sex, its objective was the sexual physiology peculiar to women and the regulation of births. Foucault technology of sex was a repressive theory. Since the topic of sex so repressed, it became a topic that people wanted to talk about since it was not allowed. Sex was an important topic of confession within the church because they would confess the sinful act of sex or anything related to sex, since they know it was wrong. The discussion of sex is still repressed today, and I believe it always will be. Many people learn about sex education today in school during health class. I do not think sex should be repressed, instead I think it is something people should be able to talk about so they know knowledge about it and know all the facts and risk that comes along with it. When Foucault talks about sex and medicine, he tries to correlate how medicine can control sex, especially within the lower economic class. The upper class had many theories that they were trying to force upon the lower class in terms of repression and sex. The technology of sex was trying to make the topic of sex not the social norm.

In Michael Foucault’s piece, “The History of Sexuality”, he discusses the discourse around sex. Sex is often a subject in which people tend to not speak about it publicly. Sex has this way of making people uncomfortable and thought of as more inappropriate act instead of a natural act. Sex in the 17th century was a shameless act and people were liberated based on their sexual activities. It was considered an activity only done inside the home between husband and wife. This was thought of to eliminate any discourse regarding sex. Foucault questions why sex is so shameful and why people are so afraid to speak of it. Sex in his eyes was a natural act between a man and a woman to show their love and intimacy for each other. The repression of sex was a focal point in this piece and Foucault goes on to discuss the rise and publicity of sex throughout time.

The repression of sex made people want to talk about a supposed “illegal activity” deemed by the church. It is natural for humans to go against their beliefs and challenge society or even God. Sex was an important topic in confession in church. It was highly privatized and sensitive matter. It was a way of relieving sins, but the discourse on sex focused on language. By creating appropriate language it would allow people to talk about sexual activities. It would make people more comfortable confessing in church. In my opinion, this was propaganda by the church to gain more followers.

Sex is still repressed today, sex education is rarely taught in schools, even if sex is discussed it is not talked about to the fullest extent. Parents are afraid of letting their kids know about the sexual side of life. They’re afraid that they might start experimenting. Improper sex knowledge can be very harmful for young kids. Sex should not be repressed anymore, by allowing to de-censor sex and educate people on sex it could have a beneficial impact on society.

Foucault discusses three different technologies of sex in Part 4, Chapter 4: Periodization which how the discourse of sex changed in the 19th century. Moving away from the repressive cycle Foucault attempts to find the origin of sexuality through genealogy and saw two major breaks of its line. First was that sexuality was limited to marriage, and not letting sexuality be exposed by the body, the second break was in the 19th century as these limitations began to loosen up and sexuality was being explored. He argues that there were three technologies that changed the relationships or ideals people had about sex. The sexuality of children, medicine and economics where changed ideals repressed by the church, which Foucault argues were no longer of self interest but were social interest that were exposed and surveilled by the state and society. The technological application of medicine was used to separate sex from the body as a way of being controlled with political intention. The idea that medicine of sex could create a perfect society, free of disease, and with a pure bloodline, was used by the bourgeois as a model to design their society and by the government to regulate marriages, childbirth and population. Also sexuality in psychiatry was used by way of surveillance agencies, like child protective services, to socially control perverse and dangerous children, which ultimately led to racism. Foucault makes another argument that though sexuality is a social construct that was used to censor and repress the lower class and enforced by the elite, it was the elite themselves that practiced the same idealization for a different reason. The bourgeois wanted to maximize their lives by allowing sexuality to empower their social class. These thoughts on sexuality became the hegemonic infrastructure for the bourgeois.

In Part 4 of Chapter 4 of “The History of Sexuality”, Foucault emphasizes what he calls, “a technology of sex” (1978:123). To explain the “technology of sex”, I will need to first explain the significance of the theory of “degenerescence”. This theory implied that sexual perversions resulted in the corruption of one’s bloodline. This implication became the base of new technologies of sex. The concept of degeneracy to sex lead people to think that sexual perversions were hereditary. The widespread of concerns resulted in the creation on “technology of sex” as a preventive and controlling measure, for example medicine. In addition, this concern created a change for their society in term of sex – sex would not only harm a person but it could harm their family as well.

I will discuss how medicine was used as a technology of sex and how its application helped us understand sexuality. Medicine or the medical institutions were created to prevent sexual perversions and the “diseases” (they might entail on the family), and ensure “normality” within the family (1978:123). Eugenics was one of the results of this technology, thus the concern became about life and illness rather than punishment.

In my opinion, through using medicine as an example of the technology of sex, I think that Foucault is explaining to us how sex can be controlled, specifically towards the lower class. In this chapter he emphasizes the interest of the bourgeoisie (upper-class), and how these theories and ideals placed on the lower class are used to cater them, especially in terms of repression. The repression in the nineteenth century was meant to increase the dominance of the bourgeoisie, thus the deployment of sexuality on the lower class. In abusing their power, the bourgeoisie managed to exaggerate the importance of sex rather than repress it. In conclusion, sexuality varies depending on one’s class, for the bourgeoisie/upper class it was used in means of self-affirmation and for the lower class it was used as means of control. Proving that because sexuality became a means of exercising power and control, repression did not actually exist.