Foucault, Repression, and the Scientia Sexualis

In the chapter "We 'Other Victorians,'" Foucault examines the interests which support the discourse on sexual repression. He writes, "The affirmation of a sexuality that has never been more rigorously subjugated than during the age of the hypocritical, bustling, and responsible bourgeoisie is coupled with the grandiloquence of a discourse purporting to reveal the truth about sex , modify its economy within reality, subvert law that governs it, and change its future." He identifies the pleasure obtained by the deliberate transgression of society's laws and norms, as well as that obtained by the promise of an ideal world in the future. This observation appears fairly accurate and can illustrate the ways in which power induces pleasure.

If we look at the discourse on sexual repression that is contemporary with Foucault, we see the importance of sexual liberation, free love, and otherwise defying cultural norms in the '60s and '70s. What is striking to me is how often the rhetoric from this time period deals with transcending bounds, freeing oneself, and achieving individual expression. It is as if sex became not a pleasure in its own right, but instead a pleasure because of its rebellion. It is here that we find the pleasure of power. Inherent in the rebellion, the liberation, and the defiance, is a sensation of power that we have control over ourselves and our world, and no one else is able to influence us. The sensation can be so strong as to overwhelm our perceptions of the world and distort them. This leads to the ironic idea that, in our quest for liberation, we are almost completely determined by the society around us. Non-comformity becomes the norm for many people, and even though they think they are becoming their own individuals, they are simply falling into the stereotype that has been created for them. I believe that people so adamant and ostentatious about contradicting society are not genuine in their examination of values, but instead they are influenced by the overwhelming sensation of pleasure derived from their false impression of individual power. Where there is strong emotion and rhetoric, there also tends to be strong personal interest, and hence blindness to any other form of examination than one's own. Therefore I think Foucault is right to step back from the strong condemnations of the repressive hypothesis and examine the problem from a different point of view.

Foucault also analyzes the idea of pleasure with regards to the confession in the following reading, "Scientia Sexualis," and what he calls "the specific pleasure of the true discourse on sex." This pleasure derives from the knowledge we can obtain from sex, and even from the process of obtaining and analyzing that knowledge itself. There is no doubt that a large number of people receive a pleasant sensation from getting something off their chest, and the teasing out of our inner feelings. However, I remain unconvinced that the process of the confession is directly linked to this development. His argument is entirely logical, but I do not know enough about the history of the sexuality discourse to refute it. It is true that Foucault strives to find similarities and differences throughout discourses that can describe their development, but in so doing he still must apply his own interpretation as to what facts are most important and then necessarily leave out the rest. Therefore, his analysis of the discourse is limited, although examined in much more depth than is a commonly accepted idea. The only thing I keep going back to is that Foucault's analyses can provide a basis for further thought and offer an alternative to a current view, and that he may outline some interesting developments that one would only be able to verify or refute if he conducted his own thorough examination.