Sociology Essay: Intellectual History of Sexuality: Foucault & Freud

This sociology essay delves into the intersection of intellectual history of sexuality as interpreted by Foucault and Freud. It examines Foucault's critique of Freud, focusing on the shift in understanding of sexuality in the 20th century, particularly the relationship between knowledge and sexuality. The essay explores various aspects, including the Victorian origins, the concept of the science of sexuality, and the development and decentering of sexuality. It analyzes the repressive hypothesis, the role of discourse, and the concept of bio-power. The essay also discusses the impact of sexuality on society, focusing on issues like LGBT rights and the construction of sexuality in modern society, concluding with a discussion on how Foucault's ideas challenge traditional understandings of sexuality and the implications of power dynamics in shaping sexual discourse.

Sociology
Name
Course
Professor
Date

Introduction
The discussion involves the theoretical and academic literature which shows the intersection of
intellectual history of sexuality according to Foucault and Freud (Cook, 2014). The Foucault
critique on Freud indicates that the twentieth century saw a heightened concentration by gearing
relationship between knowledge and sexuality. The concentration on sexuality was apparently
opposed in orientation to Sigmund Freud and the Michael Foucault. Foucault presents his
information by showing that there is a standoff between the intentional and unintentional moves
that decenter sexuality based on the privileged site of knowledge that is connected to
subjectivity. In the discussion, each paragraph shows different assumption based on sexuality.
The first paragraph analyses the origin of Victorian. The concept of the science of sexuality and
also issue on hypothesis analyzed by Foucault is clearly discussed. The essay, therefore,
concludes by showing developments and the decentering of sexuality. The arguments are based
on psychoanalytic – Foucault on polarization which has been identified as a vital product in the
modern world (Foxhall, 2016).
Different arguments have been designed to describe the origin of Victorians. The book shows
that a long time ago many people supported a Victorian regime which continued to dominate the
society for a long time. The Victorians are associated with hypocritical sexuality. The historians
describe how at the seventeenth century was associated with the frankness on sexual practices
(Huffer, 2016). At this time sexual practices had little secrecy and words were altered without
the undue reticence. Also, the origin indicates how things were done without concealment and
also a high tolerant familiarity to the illicit aspects in the society. These behaviors characterized
the origin of Victorians whereby the 17th century is attributed as the time of gestures, shameless
and open transgressions.

Over 50 years the LGB rights have significantly broadened in some countries but to other
countries, the issue of gay and bisexual sex has narrowed. The concepts of the science of
sexuality try to explain the sexual orientation which is being misinterpreted by people in
different countries. In the modern world, political and popular support for LGB rights has raised
the issue of prevalence, causes, and effects of non-heterosexual orientations (Kelly, 2013). The
concept of the science of sexuality comes up with different assumptions whereby it shows that
across cultures there is a small number of individuals who have non-heterosexual feelings. This
shows that the specific expression and the difference between sexual orientation changes widely
depending on the norms and cultural practices of an individual. The scientific research suggests
that individuals sexual feelings most of the times they do develop in a similar way to all people
around the world. In addition, the science of sexuality identifies that men's and women's sexual
orientation features always manifest themselves in different ways. The science shows that men's
sexual orientation is likely to be linked to the patterns and techniques used to arouse sex as
compared to women's sexual orientation (Konoval, 2013). There are also different biological
factors which try to explain the concept of the science of sexuality. Factors such as prenatal
hormones and the specific genes in our bodies have different profiles on one's sex. They are
likely to enhance sexual orientation although most of the times they are not associated with the
sole cause. The scientific evidence shows that both biological and non-environmental factors
tend to influence the concept of the science of sexuality. On another hand, scientific findings
have also suggested that the science of sexuality is composed of different actions which cannot
be learned or be taught through social means. Also, there is little evidence to prove those non-
heterosexual orientations become common to individuals with increased social tolerance (Lash,
2014).

Freud's repressive hypothesis was on notions of sexuality and how it develops. The concept is
that Freud is seen as the product of new puritanism of the past decade. As in the realm of sexual
thought, it's clear that most features of sexual treatment in sex are completely connected to
puritanism. Foucault question this idea of Puritanism as a source of pain and unhappiness to
individuals. The Foucault sensibility is based on sexual counterrevolution which is clearly
confirmed by the auto biological revelations (Piper, 2018). Arguments such as penis envy, how
Foucault respond to assertions are based on the psychoanalysis. Foucault states that the received
understanding of the dominant sexuality is always predominantly repressive and it is censorious
thus imposing silence. However, this shows that at the same time of repressing the talk on sex
there is an exciting discourse on the subject matter which gives a range of disciplines. In general,
Foucault indicates that sexuality is always important and therefore the magnitude of repression
will have no importance. In the real sense, he says that the incitement to discourse is attributed to
the effect of creating apt intensification of sexuality (Renaud, 2013). Foucault criticizes Freud
assumptions by showing that the discourse of sex would give rise to knowledge, new categories
and also give rise to mechanism and values which are both articulated in the field of power. The
power will act as an instrument of coming up with a new population which will be both healthy
and alive thus ready to work and reproduce by itself. There is repression to be sure and therefore
Foucault uses the overstatement arguments so as to be sure and emphasize on the knowledge that
is relevant to the repression of sexuality. The key assumption he made was that he constructed
sexuality arena which did not target the oppressed but the ruling classes in the society. Foucault
shows the bourgeois schoolboy who was the main target of the new sexuality in society. The
consequences of sexuality are that it has mechanisms which help in emulation of the entire
population. The consequences are based on bio-power which is the centrality of sexuality norms.

Conclusion
Sociologists argue that there are major theoretical perspectives which indicate the role of
sexuality to modern society. Some members struggle for recognition and issue of deviant
sexualities such as LGBT that has changed the modern world. The LGBT has experienced some
historic advancements whereby members are practicing it without fear. The issue of LGBT tends
to point out the Foucault criticize Freud (Shepherdson, 2012). This is evident is on how Foucault
challenges the dominant understandings of sexuality during the Victorian era. Foucault indicates
that Freud was not the major figure who came up with the complexity of human sexual life and
there he has no fulfillment to control the practice. Also, Foucault shows that Freud was unable to
notice the true ugliness of sex and thus he lacked the courage to support his insight when the
issue of sexuality became unpopular. Foucault presents a caution regarding the dangers of
creating the science of sexuality. Foucault shows that there is a need to control sexuality and how
people talk about sexuality. Foucault indicated that there are four sources of power which
contribute to the construction of sexuality. He threatened the society by showing that a person's
sexual preferences can affect his or her behavior thus there is a need to control one's behavior.
Today the issue is to maintain power (Shively & De Cecco, 2014). The issue of power made
Foucault uncover sexuality as a construct thus allowing people to question themselves on their
beliefs about sexuality. The notion of sexuality as indicated in the hypothesis identified by
Foucault it's clear that our sexuality is based on sexual orientation discourse. The hypothesis
holds in the sense that we are always open and free for our sexuality despite the drawbacks
associated with sex discourse. The discourse of sexuality has changed since the 17th century thus
bringing the centering discourse which is connected to science. Foucault concludes by showing
that socialization is a source of power that determines the desire and pleasure to sexual discourse.

References
Cook, D. (2014). Foucault, Freud, and the repressive hypothesis. Journal of the British Society
for Phenomenology, 45(2), 148-161.
Foxhall, L. (2016). Pandora unbound: a feminist critique of Foucault’s History of Sexuality.
In Dislocating masculinity ,6(79), (pp. 141-153).
Huffer, L. (2016). Strange Eros: Foucault, ethics, and the historical a priori. Continental
Philosophy Review, 49(1), 103-114.
Kelly, M. G. (2013). Foucault's' History of Sexuality Volume I, The Will to Knowledge': An
Edinburgh Philosophical Guide: An Edinburgh Philosophical Guide, 6ed. Edinburgh
University Press.
Konoval, B. (2013). Toward a Psycho-Analytics of Power: Nietzsche’s Ascetic Priest in
Foucault’s Genealogy of Sexuality. Nietzsche-Studien, 42(1), 204-242.
Lash, S. (2014). Genealogy and the Body: Foucault/Deleuze/Nietzsche 1. In Sociology of
Postmodernism ,56(67), (pp. 55-77).
Piper, C. (2018). Historical constructions of childhood innocence: removing sexuality. In Of
innocence and autonomy: children, sex and human rights, 7(45), (pp. 26-46).
Renaud, J. (2013, October). Rethinking the repressive hypothesis: Foucault’s critique of
Marcuse. In Symposium(Vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 76-93).
Shepherdson, C. (2012). The Body, Sexuality, and Sexual Difference. Angelaki, 17(2), 105-121.
Shively, M. G., & De Cecco, J. P. (2014). From sexual identity to sexual relationships: A
contextual shift. In Origins of sexuality and homosexuality, 8(67), (pp. 1-26).