Feminism Three Topics on Sexuality

Feminism

Three Topics on Sexuality

Examine how Two Feminist Thinkers Recast the Self as Subject?

Since its initiation as a theoretical discourse, feminist theory has been tasked with revising traditional theories of the self. Specifically, the traditional, essentialist, humanistic theory of the self had been predicated on the notion that subjectivity is subsumed with an instinct toward procreation, and feminism versed this view. Moreover, the universalist theory of subjectivity has an inherent bias toward the male, who is viewed as the passive agent while the female is subordinated within a position of submission. In order to advance the project of improving female agency -- one of the central motives of feminism -- it was necessary to formulate some framework of female subjectivity that did not position women as subject to male domination. Two thinkers who recast the self as subject were Eve Sedgwick and Judith Butler, each of whom situate subjectivity as socially constructed rather than biologically defined.

In "Axiomatic," Eve Sedgwick accepts Foucault's central premise that sexuality is invented when it is socially constructed. In this regard, sexuality is socially constructed rather than biologically determined. Sedgwick's theory differs from that of Simone de Beauvoir, for example, who asserts that women are inherently positioned as the other on the basis of their genitalia. Meanwhile, Sedgwick destabilizes sexuality to a greater extent than Foucault, arguing that subjectivity cannot be totalized on the basis of gender. While society is integral in shaping subjectivity, it does not have a totalizing effect. Borrowing from Derrida, Sedgwick argues that there is difference even between those who exist within the same cultural group. To this end, Sedgwick destabilizes the bond between each person and their cultural group. Instead of defining subjectivity on the basis of procreation, Sedgwick sees it as the result of the interaction between the person, their cultural group, and society.

Butler is similar to Sedgwick in that she sees subjectivity as culturally determined rather than biological. However, she considers subjectivity to be less individualistic, arguing that people can never be truly autonomous but instead are inextricably tied to the worldview of their cultural group. In this regard, a lesbian or feminist cannot conceive of themselves as distinct from how lesbians and feminists are defined by society. Both Butler and Sedgwick demonstrate the way in which the self is a social being, rather than one that is driven by a procreative instinct.

Discuss Eve Sedgwick's Ideas of Minoritizng and Universalizing

In "Axiomatic," Eve Sedgwick offers an outline of minoritizing and universalizing the question of hetero and homosexuality that contrasts with the traditional constructivist vs. essentialist framework. The minoritizing framework is predicated on the notion that homosexuality only pertains to a minority of people who identify themselves as being homosexuals. This approach is characterized by the perception that one's sexual orientation can exist in a wholly autonomous manner, distinct from the opposite orientation. Meanwhile, the universalizing approach involves the belief that homosexuality is of "determinative importance" for everyone (244). Sedgwick's use of the term "determinative" is important in this context as it reflects the crucial impact that homo and heterosexuality has in defining the subjectivity of members of both sexual orientations. The subjectivity of a homosexual is shaped in large part through the way in which heterosexuality is constituted in society, and vice versa -- heterosexuality is shaped through the privilege it enjoys in relation to homosexuality. In this regard, sexuality is relational and can only be defined through its relation with the opposite sexual orientation.

One of Sedgwick's central beliefs is that it is necessary to do away with concepts of sexual origin. For there to be an a priori sexual origin, people would be born with a sexual orientation and culture would have no impact in shaping people's sexual identity. To this end, a gay male in the 19th century would be exactly the same as a gay male in the 21st century, and this cannot be the case. The struggles faced by a gay male hundreds of years ago are vastly different from those faced by a male today. Instead of sexual origin -- the conceptual framework of the essentialist/constructivist approach -- it is more useful to conceive of sexuality as existing within the binary between minoritivizing and universalizing. Concepts of sexual origin are fallacious because they are totalizing and attempt to ascribe the same worldview to people within a particular sexual orientation. Moreover, the sexual origin approach suggests that one's gender is indistinct from their sexuality, which cannot be the case; it also sees nature and nurture as being permanent, when both considerations are dynamic.

What is the Repressive Hypothesis and what is Foucault's Critique of it?

The Repressive Hypothesis issued by Foucault concerns the notion that the widespread repression with regard to sexuality that occurred in the 19th century actually engendered the increased popularity of sexuality within the public sphere. Foucault argues that the attempt to censor sexuality actually established the formulation of entire discourses surrounding sexuality that made it ubiquitous within society. He states "A censorship of sex? There was installed rather an apparatus for producing an ever greater quantity of discourse about sex, capable of functioning and taking effect in its very economy" (1506). Thus, the attempts to police sexuality actually resulted in the popularizing of sexuality in society, as people began to speak of sexuality and conversations soon developed. The "apparatus" concerning sex denotes the extent to which sexuality is embedded in the power structures of society, and sexuality became embedded within the economy. The heteronormative model for sexuality assumed power and queer sexuality was marginalized and recognized as taboo by society. When sexuality was constituted by discourses, it opened the door for sexuality to become the subject of conversation and people finally began to discuss their opinions regarding it. The Repressive Hypothesis thus argues that the attempt to repress sexuality actually resulted in the liberation of sexuality, and indeed the liberation of sexuality would in turn represent one of the central themes of Victorian culture and the literature of the 19th century.