“A censorship of sex? There was installed rather an apparatus for producing an ever greater quantity of discourses about sex, capable of functioning and taking effect in its very economy” (Foucault 23).
The history of sexual development is identified by many cases related to censorship issues. Sex and sexuality reflect human psychology evoking social, political, and cultural inquiries. Being one of the inherent processes, which are necessary from the basic biological instincts, sex cannot be ignored by people’s cognition. Its discussion is vital for understanding the correlation between human existence’s physical and moral aspects. Sexual preferences define the differences in the process of identity formation (Margot 6). Accepting the difference in quality and orientation is vital in building healthy relationships with others. As far as sexuality is an essential part of human existence, its censorship contributes to the development of a greater quantity of discourses regarding sex.
Censorship of sex advances the idea that the topic is forbidden to be discussed freely. Considering the psychological comprehension of “forbidden,” it is equalized with negative concepts because nothing would be banned without appropriate reasons. As a result, traditional sexuality can be estimated as an act of wrongdoing. The gender roles distribution and the social order are based on sexuality as a physiological basis of human existence (Chusky et al 180). However, as mentioned earlier, this discussion cannot be avoided, which causes other discourses about sex creation. For example, homosexual topics can be considered as a replacement for the traditional sex interpretation caused by censorship inquiries. However, when homosexuality became prohibited and censured, society started to treat it as a disease (Maynard 158). Moreover, human psychology’s feature is that forbidden issues are usually the most tempting ones. People desire to learn why something is forbidden or limited. Therefore, they strive to learn more about the censored issue. As Foucault mentions, the censorship of sex becomes an apparatus to enhance the interest in the topic (Foucault 23). Halperin discusses similar concepts in his work called Is There a History of Sexuality?
One of the significant differences between Foucault’s and Halperin’s works is the terminological basis. The first author identifies sex as a cultural phenomenon, while the second differentiates between sex and sexuality. From Halperin’s point of view, sex can be related to the physical acts in the human body, while sexuality involves the comprehensive structure of social interaction (Halperin 25). Halperin defines sexuality as a “separate sphere of private existence” impacted by social and political factors (Halperin 25). This postulate means that sexuality cannot be avoided or removed from human consciousness.
The researcher analyzes the ancient understanding of sexuality, highlighting the obviousness of the gender roles distributed within society. Similar to Halperin, Freud also highlights that gender positions, culture, and societal formation are formulated based on one sexuality (Freud 351). Halperin emphasizes that the censorship helped to understand that the nature of sexuality is bisexual. This idea is implemented in the discussed quote. The prohibition is the trigger for new development and the broadening of notions in the limited sphere. Censorship is created based on particular values established in society, for example, religious or ethical. Halperin and Foucault define sex and sexuality as positive constructs enhancing society’s development. The second part of the quote refers to the idea that sexuality is a universal concept that will survive no matter the conditions and limitations.
From the perspective of Foucault, the censorship of sex works against its initial purpose. Contrary to the aims, the limitations provoke the occurrence of a new interpretation of sexuality and the occurrence of varied discourses about sex. This notion can be described as one inherent to human psychology and physiology. Therefore, sex is an inevitable aspect of the human comprehension process and cannot be limited by societal norms. Censorship only provokes more interest in this topic and contributes to the adaptation of sexuality to the current social conditions.
Works Cited
Chusky, Tate, et al. “The Future of Sex and Gender in Psychology: Five Challenges to The Gender Binary.” American Psychologist, vol. 74, no. 2, 2019, pp. 171-193. doi:10.1037/amp0000307
Foucault, Michel. The History of Sexuality. Vintage, 1990.
Freud, Sigmund. “The Sexual Life of Human Beings”. Introductory Lectures to Psychoanalysis, edited by James Efrad and Angela Richaids, Penguin Books, 1993, pp. 344-361.
Halperin, David. “Is There a History of Sexuality?”. The Lesbian and Gay Studies Reader, edited ny Henry Abelove, Michele Aina Barale, and David Halperin, Routledge, 1993, pp. 416-31.
Margot, Francis. “On the Myth of Sexual Orientation.”. Queerly Canadian, edited by Henry Maureen FitzGerald and Scott Rayter, Women’s Press, Canadian Scholars, 2012, pp. 1-22.
Maynard, Steven. “On the Case of the Case: The Emergence of the Homosexual as a Case History in Early-Twentieth-Century Ontario”. On the Case, edited by Wendy Mitchinson, Franca Iacovetta, and William S. Maynard, University of Toronto Press, 1998, pp. 153-170.