I immediately found that the tone AFS takes in discussing gender was a lot more open for discussion and interpretation than the tone used in A Billion Wicked Thoughts. Instead of forcing research with uncertain results upon their audience, AFS presents research as she finds it and not only that, she encourages and provides readers with references to search for "truth" for themselves (Kant, anyone?). By encouraging an open dialogue and discussion on her research, I at least was a lot more open to what AFS had to say (and maybe a little less defensive).
One idea that was presented in these initial readings that jumped out at me involved the ideas of "biopower" and "biopolitics", terms I had to study in my Theories of Culture class last semester but promptly forgot about...until now. This idea is relatively new, developed in the last 50 (ish?) years by the French theorist, Michel Foucault. According to my notes, biopolitics is the calculated management of life, where the rule of "norms" largely replaced the rule of law. As Foucault put it, "the basic biological features of the human species became the object of a political strategy, of a general strategy of power." It involves using science to justify what is "normal" and what is not, and using this information to push a political agenda. This concept is pretty important I think in our discussion and understanding of gender and politics. AFS also mentions Foucault in the first chapter, saying "By helping the normal take precedence over the natural, physicians have also contributed to populational biopolitics. We have become, Foucault writes, a 'society of normalization'" (8). The looming question remains, what constitutes normal in relation to gender? After one chapter of Sexing the Body, I get the sense that AFS will challenge our thoughts on the subject and how we define ourselves and each other.
One idea that was presented in these initial readings that jumped out at me involved the ideas of "biopower" and "biopolitics", terms I had to study in my Theories of Culture class last semester but promptly forgot about...until now. This idea is relatively new, developed in the last 50 (ish?) years by the French theorist, Michel Foucault. According to my notes, biopolitics is the calculated management of life, where the rule of "norms" largely replaced the rule of law. As Foucault put it, "the basic biological features of the human species became the object of a political strategy, of a general strategy of power." It involves using science to justify what is "normal" and what is not, and using this information to push a political agenda. This concept is pretty important I think in our discussion and understanding of gender and politics. AFS also mentions Foucault in the first chapter, saying "By helping the normal take precedence over the natural, physicians have also contributed to populational biopolitics. We have become, Foucault writes, a 'society of normalization'" (8). The looming question remains, what constitutes normal in relation to gender? After one chapter of Sexing the Body, I get the sense that AFS will challenge our thoughts on the subject and how we define ourselves and each other.
The last question that you pose is indeed an interesting one. I think that AFS will have a lot to say on the matter and the idea of 'normalization' when it comes to sexuality and gender is a touchy subject. Gender roles and sexuality have intertwined into a messy issue where science, religion, and other disciplines try to link behaviors and attitudes to male or female. Straight or gay. This question will hopefully be addressed in class discussion and in later parts of Sexing the Body.
ReplyDeleteI thought about bringing M. Foucault and biopolitics in here, but decided it was too hard to follow. But this really is a book about and OF 'biopolitics'; about how new 'forms of life' can be created by changing the words we use to construct the world. And the DNA tests. And the hormone assays, and, and, and.
ReplyDelete