Michael Foucault's Repressive Hypothesis

1098 Words5 Pages
Jevay Thompson Communication 450 April 27th, 2010 A Response to Question 8 Michael Foucault’s repressive hypothesis ‘supposes that since the rise of the bourgeoisie, any expenditure of energy on purely, pleasurable activities have been frowned upon’.3 As a result sex has been treated as a private affair that only takes place properly between a husband and a wife. The effort then became to not only make an effort to prevent extra-marital sex, but to also make it unthinkable and unspeakable.1 In this piece, Foucault raises three doubts about this repressive hypothesis. The first of which is: “ is sexual repression an established and historical fact? The second: “are prohibition, censorship and denial truly the forms through which power is exercised in a general way, if not in every society, most certainly in our own?” And third: “was there really a historical rupture between the age of repression and the critical analysis of repression?”3 The rise of the repression was thought to lead to a “physical effect of blissful suffering from feeling in one’s body” but instead “there was installed rather an apparatus for producing an even greater quantity of discourse about sex.” 1 In other words the repression should have led to silence on the issue, but instead repression led to a discursive explosion. While discussion was prohibited, “an institutional incitement to speak about sex” was prevalent. One could parallel this situation with the alcohol prohibition that took place in the early 20th century. Not allowing the public to have alcohol was expected to lower rates of social problems such as domestic abuse. Instead, prohibiting alcohol ignited a variety of gangsters and behind the scene ‘regulars’ finding ways to take advantage of the law and purchase alcohol. In “The History of Sexuality”, Foucault gives the example of 18th century secondary schools. Sex was
Open Document